Layman's Bible commentary.

UNIVERSITY
OF FLORIDA
LIBRARIES

COLLEGE LIBRARY

Digitized by the Internet Archive

in 2011 with funding from

LYRASIS IVIembers and Sloan Foundation

http://www.archive.org/details/laymansbiblecomm24kell

THE LAYMAN'S BIBLE COMMENTARY

THE LAYMAN'S BIBLE COMMENTARY
IN TWENTY-FIVE VOLUMES

Volume 1
Introduction to
the Bible

Volume 2

Genesis

Charles T. Fritsch

Volume 3

Exodus

B. Davie Napier

Volume 4
Leviticus, Numbers
James L. Mays

Volume 5

Deuteronomy,

Joshua

Edward P. Blair

Volume 6
Judges, Ruth,
I and II Samuel
Eric C. Rust

Volume 7

I and II Kings,

I and II Chronicles

Robert C. Dentan

Volume 8
Ezra, Nehemiah,
Esther, Job
Balmer H. Kelly

Volume 9

Psalms

Arnold B. Rhodes

Volume 10
Proverbs,
Ecclesiastes,
Song of Solomon
J. Coert Rylaarsdam

Volume 11

Isaiah

G. Ernest Wright

Volume 12
Jeremiah,
Lamentations
Howard T. Kuist

Volume 13
Ezekiel, Daniel
Carl G, Howie

Volume 14
Hosea, Joel, Amos,
Obadiah, Jonah
Jacob M. Myers

Volume 15
Micah, Nahum,
Habakkuk,
Zephaniah, Haggai,
Zechariah, Malachi
James H. Gailey, Jr.

Volume 16

Matthew

Suzanne de Dietrich

Volume 17

Mark

Paul S. Minear

Volume 18

Luke

Donald G. Miller

Volume 19

John

Floyd V. Filson

Volume 20

Acts of the Apostles

Albert C. Winn

Volume 21

Romans,

I and II Corinthians

Kenneth J. Foreman

Volume 22

Galatians,

Ephesians,

Philippians,

Colossians

Archibald M. Hunter

Volume 23
I and II Thessaloni-
ans, I and II Timo-
thy, Titus, Phile-
mon
Holmes Rolston

Volume 24
Hebrews, James,
I and II Peter
John Wick Bowman

Volume 25
I, II, and III John,
Jude, Revelation
Julian Price Love

THE LAYMAN'S
BIBLE COMMENTARY

Balmer H. Kelly, Editor

Donald G. Miller Associate Editors Arnold B. Rhodes

Dwight M. Chalmers, Editor, John Knox Press

VOLUME 24
THE LETTER TO THE

HEBREWS

THE LETTER OF

JAMES

THE FIRST AND SECOND LETTERS OF

PETER

John Wick Bowman

JOHN KNOX PRESS

RICHMOND, VIRGINIA

Unless otherwise indicated. Scripture quotations are from the
Revised Standard Version of The Holy Bible, copyright 1946
and 1952 by Division of Christian Education of the National
Council of the Churches of Christ in the United States of America.

© M. E. Bratcher 1962
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in
any manner whatsoever without written permission except in the
case of brief quotations embodied in critical articles and reviews.
For information address John Knox Press, Richmond 9, Virginia.

Published in Great Britain by SCM Press Ltd., London. Pub-
lished simultaneously in Canada by The Ryerson Press, Toronto.

Second printing 1966

Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 59-10454

Printed in the United States of America
J. 3771

PREFACE

The Layman's Bible Commentary is based on the conviction
that the Bible has the Word of good news for the whole world.
The Bible is not the property of a special group. It is not even the
property and concern of the Church alone. It is given to the
Church for its own life but also to bring God's offer of life to all
mankind — wherever there are ears to hear and hearts to respond.

It is this point of view which binds the separate parts of the
Layman's Bible Commentary into a unity. There are many vol-
umes and many writers, coming from varied backgrounds, as is
the case with the Bible itself. But also as with the Bible there is a
unity of purpose and of faith. The purpose is to clarify the situa-
tions and language of the Bible that it may be more and more
fully understood. The faith is that in the Bible there is essentially
one Word, one message of salvation, one gospel.

The Layman's Bible Commentary is designed to be a concise,
non-technical guide for the layman in personal study of his own
Bible. Therefore, no biblical text is printed along with the com-
ment upon it. This commentary will have done its work precisely
to the degree in which it moves its readers to take up the Bible for
themselves.

The writers have used the Revised Standard Version of the
Bible as their basic text. Occasionally they have differed from
this translation. Where this is the case they have given their
reasons. In the main, no attempt has been made either to justify
the wording of the Revised Standard Version or to compare it
with other translations.

The objective in this commentary is to provide the most help-
ful explanation of fundamental matters in simple, up-to-date
terms. Exhaustive treatment of subjects has not been undertaken.

In our age knowledge of the Bible is perilously low. At the
same time there are signs that many people are longing for help
in getting such knowledge. Knowledge of and about the Bible is,
of course, not enough. The grace of God and the work of the
Holy Spirit are essential to the renewal of life through the Scrip-
tures. It is in the happy confidence that the great hunger for the
Word is a sign of God's grace already operating within men, and
that the Spirit works most wonderfully where the Word is famil-
iarly known, that this commentary has been written and published.

The Editors and
The Publishers

THE LETTER TO THE

HEBREWS

INTRODUCTION

Authorship

The Letter to the Hebrews was early known and employed
throughout the extent of the Church, East and West. It was first
quoted in Rome by Clement, one of the Church Fathers (a.d. 95).
Thereafter it was employed in the West by several writers of the
second and third centuries. The church of Alexandria appears to
have been the first to consider that Hebrews was written by Paul
or reflected his thought It was suggested that it had been written
by Paul in Hebrew and translated into Greek by Luke. Others in
the third century held that the style was non-Pauline though the
ideas were considered to be Paul's. One of the Church Fathers of
this century, Origen, held that "God only knows certainly" who
wrote the epistle. An early papyrus manuscript of the third cen-
tury, recently discovered, which emanates from Egypt and pos-
sibly Alexandria, places Hebrews immediately after Romans and
before First Corinthians, thereby indicating the belief that the
epistle was from the pen of Paul.

From the period of the Reformation to modem times there has
been great diversity of opinion on the matter of authorship. Cal-
vin held it to be from Paul's pen, while Luther thought of ApoUos
as the author and Erasmus suggested Clement of Rome. Others
gave their vote to Barnabas. One startling suggestion was that the
letter was written by Priscilla. More recent writers continue to
propose a variety of authors, no one of whom has won a majority
of supporters.

Readers

There is as much disparity of opinion regarding the Chris-
tian group addressed in the letter as in the matter of authorship.
From the early fourth century there have been those who have be-

8 HEBREWS: INTRODUCTION

lieved that the letter was addressed to the church in Jerusalem, or
at any rate to the Palestinian church. Others have thought of a
Jewish-Christian community in one of the large centers of the
ancient world, such as Alexandria, Rome, or Ephesus. Some sug-
gest a Hellenistic- Jewish group within the Roman church. ("Hel-
lenistic" refers to the influence of Greek ideas and culture upon
the Jewish religion. ) Others hold that the letter was addressed to
Christians as such, either including both Gentiles and Jews or
composed exclusively of Gentiles. In this last case, of course, the
title of the epistle would be a misnomer.

Date

Two sets of facts have generally been emphasized as determin-
ing the date to be assigned to the writing of the letter. The first
of these has to do, on the one hand, with the apparent use which
the author of Hebrews has made of some of the Pauline epistles
and, on the other, with the fact that Clement of Rome (a.d. 95)
quotes from Hebrews in his letter to the Corinthian church. Thus
Deuteronomy 32:35-36 is used by Paul in Romans 12:19 and by
Hebrews at 10:30. Similarly, in both Romans 4:17-21 and He-
brews 11:11-12 and 19 reference is made to the age of Abraham
and Sarah at the time of the promise of the birth of Isaac.
Clement refers to Jesus as "the high priest of our offerings, the
defender and helper of our weakness" (see Heb. 2:18;3:1;4:15).
He also describes Jesus as one "who, being the brightness of his
majesty is by so much greater than angels as he hath inherited a
more excellent name" (see Heb. 1:3-4). These two considerations
suggest a date for the letter somewhere between a.d. 56 and 95.

The second consideration suggestive of a date is to be found
in the fact that the readers had already suffered one persecution
for their faith and were now facing the likelihood of a second
(10:32-34; 12:3-11). There has been, however, Httle imanimity
among interpreters as to which persecutions are meant. The fol-
lowing have been suggested as possibilities — the one under Claud-
ius in A.D. 49 (Acts 18:2); the well-known persecution under
Nero in a.d. 64; the destruction of the Jewish state in a.d. 70;
and the persecution under Domitian in a.d. 95.

Suggested dates for the writing of the epistle are as follows:
between 58 and 95, 85-110, 75-80, 70-95, about 95, 65 or 66,
and sometime in the middle 60's.

HEBREWS: INTRODUCTION

A New Solution

From the above statement of the history of the problem, it will
be apparent that there can be no authoritative pronomicement
relative to the circumstances, author, readers, and date of writing
of the Letter to the Hebrews. The best minds of the Church have
given their attention to the solution of these problems and have
found themselves unable to reach a imited conclusion with re-
gard to them. The Christian student, accordingly, if he is to face
the problem at all, must do so with an open mind and a sincere
endeavor to make the best of the data available.

During the past decade certain significant facts have come to
our attention which would appear to suggest the possibility of a
new solution. These data are principally of two kinds — first, the
rediscovery of or re-emphasis upon the fact that the Judaism of the
first Christian century was by no means a single phenomenon;
and second, the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls at Khirbet
Qumran and the valleys south of Wadi Qumran which have
materially increased our knowledge of one type of contemporary
Judaism in the first Christian century. It will be well at this point
to state the position which, in the light of these recent develop-
ments, will be supported in this commentary. This is to the effect
that ( 1 ) the author and readers of the Letter to the Hebrews be-
longed to a single group in the Palestinian situation to be desig-
nated as "Hellenistic-Jewish Christians"; (2) this group lived to-
gether at some undesignated point, possibly at Sychar in the
Roman province of Judea (which included both the old Judea
and old Samaria); (3) the occasion of writing was the author's
earnest desire to stimulate greater zeal for the distinctive ele-
ments in the Christian gospel among Christians who, because
of their "liberal" background, were intrigued with that gospel's
similarities to the best in Judaism; and (4) the epistle was writ-
ten shortly before the destruction of the Jewish state in a.d. 70,
when the Qumran sect was forced to abandon the center of its
influence at Khirbet Qumran. It is our intention to suggest that
both the author of the letter and his readers were converts from
the ranks of Hellenistic Judaism, and that the readers had fallen
under the influence of the teachings of the Qumran sect — an in-
fluence which had not intrigued the author, though he found it
convenient in view of his readers' known interest to state the

10 HEBREWS: INTRODUCTION

message of the gospel in terms made familiar by the teachings
emanating from Khirbet Qumran. The author, though he be-
longed to a section of the Christian community whose background
was quite other than the Hebraic Judaism out of which Paul
sprang, was nonetheless familiar with Paul's writings and gen-
erally sympathetic with his doctrinal position, while at the same
time his statement of the fundamental teachings of the Christian
faith followed a pattern different from that of Paul. The letter
then may be dated in a.d. 65 or 66, at the beginning of the First
Jewish War and almost synchronous with the date of Paul's death
in Rome.

The Hellenistic-Jewish Christianity of First-Century Palestine

First-century Judaism was by no means a unified faith. There
were sectarian cleavages within it, some of them characterized by
bitter hatred toward other branches of Jewry. The major cleavage
is generally designated by the terms "Hebraic Judaism" and
"Hellenistic Judaism" (see Acts 6:1). Paul himself employs this
terminology and claims to have belonged to the Hebraic side
(Phil. 3:5; II Cor. 11:22). The terms employed to designate the
two branches of Judaism have a reference which is far wider than
the respective languages spoken by the two parties, though the
use of different languages is not excluded. "Hebraic" and "Hel-
lenistic" refer rather to the total cultural patterns adopted: on
the one hand, adherence to strict Jewish patterns of life, and on
the other, accommodation to Greek cultural patterns. Nor does
the factor of place necessarily have any bearing upon the problem.
Paul was a native of Tarsus in Cilicia and therefore a resident of
the Hellenistic world outside of Palestine, and yet he was a typical
example of the Hebraic Jew. Contrariwise, the Sadducees, whose
center and entire life involvement was the Temple in Jerusalem,
were notable for having adopted the Hellenistic culture pattern.

To one like Paul who had been converted from the strictest
element (the Pharisaic) within Hebraic Judaism, it became clear
that culture patterns have no significance for the Christian faith.
Such was the nature of his argument with Peter at Syrian Antioch,
which he reports in Galatians 2:11-21. We read, however, in Acts
6 and 7 of a sharp controversy which developed between the
Hebraic-Jewish Christians and their HeUenistic-Jewish Christian
brethren.

We have little enough to go on here — merely the account of the

HEBREWS: INTRODUCTION 11

controversy itself as narrated in the sixth chapter and a statement
of the beliefs of the Hellenistic- Jewish Christians as contained
in Stephen's speech in chapter 7. It seems clear, however, that
the Hellenistic party were generally committed to what one might
term the more "prophetic" point of view. This included the idea
proclaimed by the prophets as early as Amos in the eighth century
before Christ that the true faith had universal significance and so
was equally for all peoples. The same striking idea is abundantly
illustrated in Stephen's address — ^that God's revelation of himself
to men is independent of land (Acts 7:2, 9, 30-31, 36, 38). This
revelation is also independent of cultural background, as Moses'
culture was largely that of the Pharaohs (vss. 17-22) and of
Midian (vss. 23-29). It is likewise independent of a particular
house of worship, both that which Stephen calls "the tent of
witness in the wilderness" and Solomon's Temple (vss. 44-50).
And finally, the implication is that God's revelation is independent
even of the people of the Law (the Jews) , for Stephen makes it
clear that it was characteristic of Israel that they rejected the
revelation which God gave through selected individuals called
"prophets" (vss. 25-26, 35-36, 51-53).

The Hellenistic- Jewish Christian faith as proclaimed by Stephen
is reflected throughout Hebrews, notably in 2:5-18, where the
author argues on the basis of Psalm 8:4-6 that Jesus in his in-
carnation has come "that by the grace of God he might taste
death for every one" (vs. 9). The same point is made in connec-
tion with our author's choice of Melchizedek, "king of Salem,
priest of the Most High God" (7: 1-3), as one who though he was
in no sense a Jew yet was a blessing both to Abraham and to all
his descendants, including the Levitical priesthood (7:4-10).

The unworthiness of "rebeUious" Israel is also portrayed with
telling effect (3:7-19), in contrast with faithful prophetic spirits
like Abraham and his descendants, Joseph and Moses, "the proph-
ets," and others of their type who siiffered persecution at the
hands of the forefathers of the Jews themselves (ch. 11). The
true faith's independence of land and even of the Holy City of
Jerusalem is brought out with telling force by Hebrews (11:10,
14-16, 23-31; 13:12-14).

Finally, Stephen's thesis that the true faith does not depend
upon the use of a particular house of worship is directly related
to the major theme of Hebrews. This letter, like Stephen, takes
its start from the instruction which God gave Moses in Exodus

12 HEBREWS: ESTTRODUCTION

25:40. Moses was to erect a house of worship "according to the
pattern which was shown" him on the mountain (Heb. 8:5; Acts
7:44). The writer maintains that the true house in which God's
worship is to be carried on is a spiritual or eternal one (9:11-12).
That is, it is a house made up of living personalities (3:6) — a
thought also worked out by Paul (Eph. 4:11-16; Col. 2:19). In
addition to these major similarities between the message of
Stephen and that of Hebrews, there are minute ones of a striking
sort of which but one may be mentioned here, namely, the medi-
ation by angels of the Old Testament revelation (Acts 7:53;
Heb. 2:2).

It seems clear from the above comparison that the author and
his readers, who as we have said belonged to a single group of
second-generation Christians (Heb. 2:3-4), must have been
Hellenistic-Jewish Christians of the type represented by the
"seven" of Acts 6:5-6. This element in the Early Church, dating
back to at least a.d. 35, was scattered after the persecution that
arose as the result of Stephen's martyrdom "throughout the
region of Judea and Samaria" (Acts 8:1). If we allow some
thirty years to intervene before the writing of Hebrews, it will
perhaps appear not unlikely that they should have drawn together
at some central point. And what better place could be imagined
than a spot near the ancient capital city of Samaria, possibly at
Sychar?

This possibility moves into the realm of probability when the
incident recounted in John 4 is recalled (see especially vss. 5 and
39). For, as has been shown recently, the interests manifested by
the Gospel of John are those of the Hellenistic-Jewish branch of
the Christian Church, and it is striking that the city of Samaria
should be spoken of as a center of evangelism both in John 4 and
in the Book of Acts (8:4-25) in connection with the evangelistic
work of Philip, who along with Stephen was a member of the
Hellenistic- Jewish Christian community. At Mount Gerizim near
Samaria the ancient Samaritans had erected a temple in com-
petition with that at Jerusalem (John 4:20). It is, therefore, the
more striking that Jesus should declare to the woman of Sychar
that "the hour is coming when neither on this mountain nor in Jeru-
salem will you worship the Father" (John 4:21), and that "the true
worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth" (vs. 23);
while the author of Hebrews in like vein argues that "the sanctu-
ary and the true tent" in which Christian worship is to be main-

i

HEBREWS: INTRODUCTION 13

tained is one "not made with hands, that is, not of this creation"
(Heb. 8 :2; 9: 1 1 ) . Similarly, "Mount Zion," "the city of the living
God" which Christians are said by our author to approach for
worship, is "the heavenly Jerusalem" (Heb. 12:22), for as he
says, "Here we have no lasting city, but we seek the city which is
to come" (13:14).

The Discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls

The above distinction between Hebraic- and Hellenistic- Jewish
Christianity affords us only one-half of the picture suggestive
of the setting in which the letter to the Hebrews had its origin.
The momentous discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls beginning in
1947 has provided us with the other half. Though it is true that
the "monastic" community at Khirbet Qumran was the center of
the sect, yet the scroUs are witnesses to the fact that cells or
"camps" were maintained throughout all Palestine, a fact to which
Josephus apparently is referring when he speaks of the Essenes
as those who "have no certain city but many of them dwell in
every city."

It should be evident, then, that there was every chance of the
Hellenistic-Jewish Christian community in Palestine coming into
contact with and being influenced by this sect. Numerous simi-
larities may be pointed out between the teachings of the Qumran
group and those of the Letter to the Hebrews. For example, the
group spoke of themselves as the people of the (new) "covenant."
There can be no doubt that the reference of this term is to Jere-
miah 31:31-34, the passage quoted in Hebrews 8:8-12. And the
coincidence of thought between the Qumran Scrolls and He-
brews is seen to be the more striking when one notes that of the
twenty-eight references in the New Testament to the "new cove-
nant," exactly one-half are to be found in Hebrews alone. Refer-
ence has already been made to the fact that in Hebrews 8:2
coupled with 3:6 the teaching emerges that the Christian com-
munity is the true "house" or "temple" of God. This same claim
is made for itself by the Qumran community. Both the Qumran
sect and Hellenistic- Jewish Christians speak of themselves as "the
enlightened ones." Both claim to be a people who possess "truth"
in a peculiar way. Both groups claim to have experienced the
"power" of God in a special way. Both claim to constitute a "fel-
lowship of the saints" including those on earth and those in heaven.
Both consider themselves to be tested and proved by God.

14 HEBREWS: INTRODUCTION

But while there are similarities of the type indicated between
the teachings of the Qumran sect and Hellenistic-Jewish Chris-
tianity— similarities which are more or less parallel with other
groups within Judaism and Christianity, due to the fact that all
draw upon the common source of the Old Testament Scriptures
— the dissimilarities in teaching between the two groups are even
more striking. This is particularly true of their concepts of high
priesthood and sacrifice. In fact, it is exactly at this point that
the teachings of the Qumran community and of Hellenistic-
Jewish Christianity as exemplified by the Letter to the Hebrews
are found to be in violent opposition to each other. This phenom-
enon more than any other points to the conclusion that the Letter
to the Hebrews was written in the context of and contemporary
with the existence of the Qumran community at Khirbet Qumran.

It is, for example, known that this sect looked forward to the
appearance of a messiah who would be of the House of Aaron
and might therefore be termed a "priestly" or high-priestly mes-
siah. The author of Hebrews, however, shows that "our Lord was
descended from Judah, and in connection with that tribe Moses
said nothing about priests" (7:14); he concludes in consequence
that Jesus' high priesthood depends, not upon his earthly con-
nections, but upon the fact that he is of the Melchizedekian order,
that is, that he is an eternal figure (6:20; 7:11-22). It would
seem from these and like references in Hebrews that the author
is concerned to deny outright the Qumran claim that the Mes-
siah was to be of the tribe of Levi. His point is exactly that Jesus
Christ, because of his eternal character as Son of God (1:1-4),
combines within his own person both kingly and high-priestly mes-
siahships. This is in flat contradiction of the point of view elab-
orated in the Qumran community, and it would seem, therefore,
that the letter is written in the context of the teaching of that com-
munity.

There is a significant difference as well in the matter of the
character of the sacrifice to be offered in the worship of God. It
is true that the Qumran sect did not ban the use of animal sac-
rifices. They did, however, proclaim a day about to dawn within
Israel when "atonement will be made for the earth more effec-
tively than by any flesh of burnt offerings or fat of sacrifices."
This is teaching derived quite clearly from passages like Hosea
6:6 and Micah 6:6-8. Nothing in the scrolls, however, suggests
the type of sacrifice to be offered by Jesus Christ as the High

HEBREWS: ESTTRODUCnON 15

Priest of his people who "entered once for all into the Holy Place,
taking not the blood of goats and calves but his own blood, thus
securing an eternal redemption" (9:12). Nor is there any sug-
gestion anywhere in the scrolls akin to the further statement of
our author that "the blood of Christ" (the Messianic High Priest) ,
"who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish
to God," will "purify your conscience from dead works to serve
the living God" (9:14). The Old Testament precursor of such
a Messianic High Priest is, of course, the Suffering Servant of the
Lord, and of such a figure offering such sacrifice the Qumran
Scrolls know nothing.

It has often been remarked that the only Old Testament sac-
rifices which were a matter of concern to the author of Hebrews
were those performed by the high priest on the Day of Atone-
ment. On no other day of the Jewish religious year was the high
priest constrained by law to sacrifice at all. But for that day all
sacrifice must be offered by him alone. In consequence, for the
author of Hebrews only the sacrifices offered on that day were
remotely comparable to that of the eternal High Priest Jesus
Christ; and by the same token, for him the Christian life con-
stituted one continuous Day of Atonement, even as for the
Apostle Paul it was one continuous Passover (see Heb. 10:19-31;
12:22-24; 13:12-16; and I Cor. 5:6-8). It seems deeply signifi-
cant, therefore, that in the Qumran Scrolls no reference to the
Day of Atonement should thus far have been found. It is as
though Hebrews were pointing to the significant lack at this point
in the teachings of the Qumran community, and calling Hellenistic-
Jewish Christian readers' attention to the uniqueness of the Chris-
tian faith in having a Messianic High Priest of an eternal rather
than an earthly order, whose sacrifice of himself has given to the
Christian life the character of an everlasting Day of Atonement.

As has been said already, two references in the epistle itself
are perhaps indicative of a date. The first is at 5:12, where it is
stated that the readers "by this time . . . ought to be teachers."
It would seem that the community had been together for a con-
siderable length of time after the scattering abroad indicated in
Acts 8:1. The other reference is that pertaining to the two per-
secutions— one already passed (10:32-34), the other on the
horizon (12:3-13). If we may assume that the first of these per-
secutions was that which arose about Stephen in approximately
A.D. 35, the second may be conveniently reckoned as associated

16 HEBREWS: INTRODUCTION

with the First Jewish War in a.d. 66-70. During this period, as we
now know, the Qumran community was thriving, and its influence
throughout the Roman province of Judea was widespread. We
may well conclude, therefore, that the occasion prompting the
writing of Hebrews was the attractive nature of this sect's teach-
ings for Christians who had emerged from the Hellenistic- Jewish
community and for whom accordingly, "temple," "land," "sac-
rifice," and "holy city" were of as little concern as for the Qum-
ran community. In the meantime, too, we know that the center
of Christian evangelistic effort had passed from Jerusalem to
Syrian Antioch, bypassing Samaria and its Hellenistic-Jewish
community on the way! That community had never become a
band of "teachers" or evangelists with a gospel of God's redemp-
tive activity on behalf of all men everywhere and with a zeal for
carrying that gospel to the ends of the earth, though the creative
effect of the persecution out of which the community had sprung
surely gave early promise of such zeal and Christian statesman-
ship (Acts 8:1, 25; Heb. 5:12; 10:32-39). All signs indicate that
the early fires had burned low in this Christian group. They were
becoming "fainthearted" (Heb. 12:3), and they fretted under the
discipline imposed by Christian living (12:4-11). Like the church
at Laodicea, they were now "neither cold nor hot" (Rev. 3:15) —
a dangerous attitude exposing such "fainthearted" Christians to
the attractions of the nearest second-best religious interest. So far
as Judaism was concerned, that second-best was to be found in the
high motivation and zeal, as well as in the exalted claim to be the
"elect" community (the genuine Israel of God), on the part of
the Qumran sect. It was here the attraction lay, then, for this
Hellenistic- Jewish Christian community at Sychar. And we know
that coupled with this attractiveness to be found in the highest
element of the old faith, the fires of nationalism were burning
high in the early 60's in the Holy Land — fires which burst into
the flames of open revolt against Rome in a.d. 66. But neither
nationalism nor a second-best religion is good enough for fol-
lowers of Jesus Christ, who himself "suffered outside the gate" of
the Holy City (Heb. 13:12). Accordingly, his followers must "go
forth to him outside the camp" of Judaism, "bearing abuse for
him" (13:13).

HEBREWS: INTRODUCTION 17

The Message

Hebrews has been termed "the Epistle of the Covenant" and
"the Epistle of the High Priesthood of Jesus Christ." Both of these
characterizations represent the truth in some measure. Neither
singly nor together, however, do they give us a comprehensive
picture of the message of Hebrews. Each represents a major stress
of the letter, and each clearly gives evidence of the contemporary
situation with which the author and his readers are concerned.
But both elements may be said rather to constitute "means" which
our author employs in presenting his message and endeavoring to
arrive at the goal he has in view, rather than the goal itself.

The over-all theme of the letter, and therefore the message
which its author is endeavoring to present, may be phrased thus:
the responsibilities and privileges of "sonship": (1) of the "Son
of God" as eternal High Priest; (2) of the "sons of men" as
members of God's household. As will appear from scanning the
outline of the letter, there is a constantly recurring interplay of
emphases upon the nature and work of the unique Son, on the
one hand, and of similar factors relating to the "sons" on the
other. Jesus Christ is first and last the unique Son of God (1:1-4).
As such he is in his own person and work separated from all
prophets, angelic intermediaries (1:5-14), and even such a great
leader of God's people as Moses himself (3:1-6). He is uniquely
over God's house rather than simply a member of it, in virtue of
his being God's Son (3:6).

But Jesus Christ has chosen through the Incarnation to identify
himself with the "sons of men" or more specifically with that
particular group among men who may be called sons of Abra-
ham, that is, true members of the household of God (2:9, 16).
He has thus identified himself with man with a view to man's
salvation and has gone through the most trying and debasing
of man's experiences — experiences brought on by man's sin and
resulting in his spiritual and moral death (2:14-18). In search-
ing for a rehgious analogy to which he might compare this work
of the eternal Son of God, the author hit upon the unique plan
of presenting Jesus' work in terms of high priesthood and the
sacrifices performed by the high priest on the Day of Atonement.
However, unwilhng to expose his argument to the attack of any
who might point out that Jesus did not belong to the Levitical

18 HEBREWS: INTRODUCTION

priesthood and therefore that the analogy of the high-priestly
work was inadequate in his case, he came forward with the
creative suggestion that Jesus' high priesthood is similar to that
of Melchizedek — an eternal one performed in an eternal taber-
nacle and associating itself with eternal sacrifices (5:8-10;
7:15-28). The argument is a valid one because of the intrinsic
nature of the being of the Son of God, a type of being trans-
cending all earthly existence (1:1-14).

The second part of the author's thesis is as important for his
goal as the first. It rests upon the underlying assumption that al-
though sons of men are in their essential being far beneath the
"Son of God," yet there is a certain kinship involved which
does not exist between the latter and any other of God's crea-
tures— not even angels. This unique kinship makes possible not
alone the Son's identification with the sons of men in their low
estate and sufferings (2:10-13), but also their identification with
him in his responsibihties and privileges. For as Christ was
"faithful over God's house as a son" (3:6), so they are called to
constitute "his house" (3:6); and as he was called to be the high-
priestly Mediator "on behalf of men in relation to God" (5:1-10),
so the demand is laid upon them to be "teachers . . . [of] the word
of righteousness" (5:11 — 6:8). Moreover, as the responsibility
laid upon the Son of God included his high-priestly work, in
which he sacrificed himself that men might draw nigh to God
through him (7:1 — 10:18), even so it is incumbent upon the
"sons" as lesser priests, who now have access to the "sanctuary"
in God's eternal tabernacle, to "draw near with a true heart in full
assurance of faith, with . . . hearts sprinkled clean from an evil
conscience and . . . bodies washed with pure water" (10:19-31).
And as Jesus, "the pioneer and perfecter of our faith," endured
to the end of the earthly race set before him (12:1-2), so the
sons are called to endure, to accept without protest the discipline
required for Christian growth (12:3-11), to remain faithful in
their allegiance to the revelation of the Christian message (12:
18-24), to recognize the divine lordship over their lives (12:
25-29), and to accept every obligation which that sovereignty of
God imposes upon his true worshipers in the realms of both re-
Hgion and social ethics (12:28 — 13:17).

Finally, the author sees that just as Jesus was called upon to
suffer "outside the gate" of the Holy City (13:12), so it is incum-
bent upon the sons that they also "go forth to him outside the

HEBREWS: INTRODUCTION 19

camp," that is, outside the contemporary Judaism in which the
author's Hellenistic- Jewish readers were raised, so "bearing abuse
for him" while they "seek the city which is to come" ( 13 : 12-16) .
In view of aU that has been said above, there can be little doubt
that th^I^tter to the Hebrews was a clarion call to Hellenistic-
Jewish Christians to sever the bonds which bound them with
Judaism, and that at the opening of the First Jewish War it
proved to be one of the effective means toward making complete
and irrevocable the final break between the Christian faith and
the older Judaism. Both faiths accepted the Old Testament as
Scripture, but the incarnate life and work of Jesus Christ gave
to the Christian Church a standard lacking in Judaism, by refer-
ence to which that Scripture must henceforth be judged and in-
terpreted.

I

20 HEBREWS: OUTLBSTE

OUTLINE

The Redemptive Power and Lordship of God's Son. Hebrews i:i —

2:18

Manifesto Regarding the Son of God (1:1-4)
Proof of the Manifesto from Scriptm*e (1 :5-14)
Redemptive Implications for the Sons of Men (2:1-18)

The Gospel Call to Become God's House. Hebrews 3:1 — 4:16

The Son's Faithfuhiess Over God's House (3:l-6a)
The Thrice-Repeated Gospel Call (3:6b — 4:16)

The Nature of the Son's High Priesthood* Hebrews 5:1 — 7:28

QuaUfications of a High Priest (5:1-10)

Qualifications of Mature Sons (5:11 — 6:20)

The Son's Melchizedekian High Priesthood (7:1-28)

The Efficacy of the Son's High-Priesdy Work. Hebrews 8:1—10:18

Summary Statement (8:1-6)
Ineffectiveness of the Old Covenant (8:7 — 9:10)
Effectiveness of the New Covenant (9:11-28)
The Once-for-All Aspect of the Son's High-Priestly Work (10:
1-18)

The Response Required of Sons to the High-Priestly Work of the
Son. Hebrews 10:19 — 13:17

Summary Statement (10:19-31)
Examples of Faith (Hope) (10:32—11:40)
Exhortation to Endurance as Sons (12:1-29)
The Communal Life of God's People Outside the Gate (13:
1-17)

Epistolary Conclusion. Hebrews 13:18-25

HEBREWS 1:1-4 21

COMMENTARY

THE REDEMPTIVE POWER AND LORDSHIP OF
GOD'S SON

Hebrews i:i — 2:18

Manifesto Regarding the Son of God (1:1-4)

Hebrews begins not as a letter but as an essay or address.
There is no salutation or indication of any kind relating to the
identity of the readers (see Introduction). Two points stand out
in these first four verses: (1) the author's desire to indicate gen-
uine continuity between the revelations given during the old and
new periods, and (2) the superior character of the revealing
medium in the new period.

The God who reveals himself and his will "of old" is the same
God who speaks to us in his Son. The men and women chosen as
the vehicle of the old revelation are called "prophets." A prophet
is by definition one who has a message from God and a com-
mission to declare it to his generation. The older revelation was
piecemeal, fragmentary, lacking in unity. It was given, too, in
"various ways" — in dreams and visions, through a burning bush,
by the "angel of the covenant," in a "stiQ small voice," and in
other ways.

In direct line with this prophetic revelation, and yet in note-
worthy contrast to it, God has now spoken to his people through
"a Son." As God's medium of revelation to man this Son is in
direct line with the prophets; in his essential nature or being,
however, he is quite different from them. This Son is described in
two ways: first, as to his essential being, and second, as to his
functions. Fundamentally he is Son of God and so bears the stamp
of the "glory of God" — a phrase which in both Hebrew and
Greek stands for the showing forth of God's real nature. This Son
is, so to speak, as closely related to the Father as are the rays
which stream forth from a source of light to the light itself, as
sunbeams to their central sun. Moreover, he is the "very stamp"
or impressed seal bearing the name of God in his human nature —
the signature of God, so to speak, impressed as in wax on the
universe.

22 HEBREWS 1:5-14

And because the Son is these things in himself, he has functions
which are far above those of all other beings. He is the agent of
creation and so is at the beginning of history; he is also the "heir"
and so is at its end (vs. 2). And as he is at the beginning and at
the end of history, so also he is in its middle, providentially "up-
holding the universe." But this Son has a relation not only to the
whole of God's created universe, but more particularly to man.
In this connection Hebrews conceives of him as man's Sin-
purifier and Lord (vs. 3). This twofold function is one upon
which the author will dwell at great length throughout the letter.
In saying that the Son has "sat down at the right hand of the
Majesty on high," the author quotes from Psalm 110:1, a Psalm
which takes us to the heart of the message of Hebrews (see 5:6;
6:20; 7:11).

These opening verses introduce us to a unique conception of son-
ship which is to carry through the epistle and throw light upon
much of its teaching. The Son of God is an eternal figure. But the
author is interested in what he does in both time and eternity,
and he begins with the Son's function in time. Christians are
already living "in these last days" (vs. 2), that is, in the period
in which the Son serves as the Mediator of God's word to man.
The exact phrase occurs only here. But a like phrase appears in
9:26; I Corinthians 10: 11; and I Peter 1 : 20; 4:7. Other passages,
too, such as I John 2:18, mean that the end- time has come. The
Christian Church, therefore, is already living in the end-time, and
Christ is God's final and definitive revelation of himself to man.
He has already made a cleansing for man's sins and has sat down
in eternity "at the right hand of the Majesty on high." The name
"Son" is accordingly the greatest to be "obtained" by any being
— greater than "angels," a word which in both the Hebrew and the
Greek simply means "messengers" and which may be applied to
every vehicle of God's revelation to man (vs. 4).

Proof of the Manifesto from Scripture (1:5-14)

The author of Hebrews is concerned to show that the name of
"Son" places Jesus Christ "above every name that is named, not
only in this age but also in that which is to come" (Eph. 1:21).
In making this demonstration he calls upon a series of texts from
the Old Testament in the Greek translation (the Septuagint). The
first of these, in verse 5, is from Psalm 2:7. The first part of the

HEBREWS 1:5-14 23

quotation was used by the voice which addressed Jesus at his
baptism (Mark 1:11). But neither here nor in 5 : 5 does the author
show any knowledge of this baptismal experience of Jesus. How-
ever, he does conceive of the Psalm as giving us the Father's
voice speaking to his eternal Son. Psalm 2 is a Messianic or
"royal" Psalm in which the reigning king or contemporary
"anointed one" (messiah) prefigures the coming great One who,
in a final sense, will fulfill the role of Messiah. It is in the same
way that the author understands the second quotation (from II
Sam. 7:14). Actually the words were originally spoken by the
prophet Nathan to David in the name of the Lord. There can be
no doubt that the author knows this, but as before he conceives
of Jesus Christ as fulfilling the promise in a far richer and deeper
sense than originally intended. The same is to be said of the third
quotation (from the Greek version of Deut. 32:43). All three
quotations are words of God concerning his eternal Son, either
at the beginning of his ministry or even at the Incarnation (note
in verse 6: "when he brings the first-bom into the world").

By way of contrast with the above description of the eternal
Son's exalted function as God's Messiah in the world, the author
now calls upon Psalm 104:4 to illustrate the transitory nature of
the angelic host. In the Hebrew the psalmist had spoken of God
as One "who makest the winds thy messengers, fire and flame thy
ministers." Every created thing, then, may serve as a minister of
God's purpose. The Greek translation, which is followed in He-
brews, reversed the order of the words to read as they are quoted
in verse 7. This change suited the purpose of the author admir-
ably, for it lays emphasis upon the transitory nature of aU of
God's created messengers. Angels, together with all of his ser-
vants, are transient by nature, as are winds and flames of fire. All
depend upon God for their existence at every moment.

Hebrews employs another royal Psalm (Ps. 45:6-7) in verses
8-9. In the Psalm the reigning "messiah" or "anointed one" is
addressed in language that stresses the exalted function of God's
emissary as he rules among men. The righteous or saving nature
of the king's fimction as "messiah" is stressed, a function cor-
responding to the view of Christ which appears throughout the
epistle.

With a yet bolder stroke the author now calls into service Psalm
102:25-27 (vss. 10-12). These verses were originally intended
by the psalmist to refer to the Lord as the Creator of the uni-

24 HEBREWS 2:1-4

verse. Hebrews unhesitatingly applies them to Christ, the eternal
Son. This is in accord with the author's previous remark that the
Son was the medium through whom God had made the worid
(vs. 2). Once again it is his purpose to show the eternal char-
acter of this Son. Finally (vs. 13), to conclude his description of
the exalted nature of the Son he again quotes Psalm 110: 1, as at
verse 3 above. And again, by contrast, all others of God's mes-
sengers are described as "ministering spirits sent forth to serve,
for the sake of those who are to obtain salvation" (vs. 14).

It is clear from this chapter that the author knows only two
categories of existence — God (with whom and in whom he in-
cludes his eternal Son), and creatures (all created beings, "an-
gels," prophets, mankind generally, and all of nature). One
senses the fact that there was a type of teaching to which the
Christian readers of this essay had been subjected and whose
tendency was to dispute the clear-cut nature of this division,
or at any rate the inclusion of the Messiah with God as his
eternal Son (see Introduction).

Redemptive Implications for the Sons of Men (2:1-18)

Responsibility for Response on Man's Part (2:1-4)

This short section comprises the first of a number of "horta-
tory sections" to be found in the letter (see 4:11-16; 5:11 — 6:8;
10: 19-39). These passages indicate plainly that the author feared
that his readers were in danger of drifting away from the tradi-
tion which they had received as Christians. It is clear that the
community to which this essay was sent belonged to the second,
or possibly the third, generation of Christians. They were not
among "those who heard" the Lord but were numbered among
those who had received the tradition from that earUest group.
However, the essay cannot have been written very late in the first
Christian century, for it is evident that this community had not
received the gospel in written form. They had merely "heard" it
(vs. 1), and it had been "attested" to them (vs. 3). They were a
hnk in the chain of tradition which went back to the Lord Jesus,
and they were an early Unk in that chain (see further 5:11-14).

At this point (vs. 2) the author introduces another traditional
beUef with regard to angels. This is to the effect that the Old
Testament revelation, and particularly that at Mount Sinai in the
giving of the Law, had been made through the instrumentality of

HEBREWS 2:5-9 25

angels. The Greek translation of Deuteronomy 33:2b (a passage
in which the Hebrew is obscure) reads "his angels were with him
at his right hand." A part of Judaism interpreted this to mean
that the Law had been given at Sinai by angels as mediators, and
the same idea appears at two places in the New Testament (Acts
7:53; Gal. 3:19).

This idea of the Old Testament revelation as given at the hands
of angels, however, did not work against its validity. The Law was
accepted as "valid," and its commands as the word of God and
therefore to be kept (vs. 2). The author's argument is from the
less to the greater. If a revelation transmitted by angels is to be re-
spected, how much more that delivered through the Son. The new
revelation has come to the Christian community from the Lord
(the Son) himself, through the first generation of the Apostles and
those who, like them, heard him speak; and God himself had ap-
plied the message to the hearts of believers, granting his Holy
Spirit to seal it to the Church (vss. 3-4).

"Signs . . . wonders . . . miracles" — ^these are the technical
words employed by the Early Church to describe the wonderful
works of Jesus and those of the Holy Spirit (see Matt. 14:2; Acts
2:22). The word translated "gifts" actually means "distributions"
or "divisions" (see 4: 12). The idea, however, is probably Uke that
in I Corinthians 12:4 and 1 1 — ^the Spirit is one and his gifts many.

The Son's Death and Exaltation (2:5-9)

In this section the author begins to come to grips with the major
problem with which he wishes to deal, namely, the redemptive ac-
tivity of the Son of God on behalf of the sons of men. We have
already seen that the angels were but "ministering spirits" (1:14)
on behalf of these sons. It is not, therefore, with the angels for
their own sake that God is concerned (vs. 5), but rather with
the redemption of the sons of men and more particularly with
"the descendants of Abraham" (2:16). Accordingly the author
indicates the present condition of these sons, their future high
destiny, and the manner in which this destiny is to be accom-
plished.

He first states unequivocally the high destiny which God has
appointed to man. He does thds in terms of Psalm 8:4-6. In the
Hebrew the Psalm indicates that man is made "Uttle less than
God." As, however, the Greek translation reads "a little less than
the angels," the quotation here served the author's purpose of

26 HEBREWS 2:5-9

contrasting the angels with men. In verse 6 "man" and "son of
man" are in Semitic parallelism, both terms meaning simply
"man." Both authors — of Psalms and Hebrews — no doubt had in
mind the original saying in Genesis 1:26 to the effect that God
has appointed man his viceroy over all his creation. God has
placed "everything in subjection under his feet." For the author
of Hebrews the dividing line between the two ages, history and
eternity, is the Incarnation. Christians are already Uving "in
these last days," the age of the "Son," not in the age "of old," the
age of the prophets (1:1-2). Accordingly, "the world to come, of
which we are speaking" (vs. 5) — that is to say, the eternal age —
has already arrived for Christians. They have already tasted of the
"powers of the age to come" (6:5). The signs and wonders and
gifts of the Holy Spirit referred to in verse 4 are without doubt
a part of these powers. It is clear, then, both from the testimony
of Scripture and from Christian experience that God has subjected
all things in both ages (the historical and the eternal) to man. It
is equally clear that however high and exalted the station of angels
may be conceived, the "glory and honor" attendant upon such
power as God has committed to man as his viceroy is something
which they do not experience.

Nevertheless, "we do not yet see everything in subjection" to
man (vs. 8). Man has not yet fully come into his heritage. How-
ever, there is one man who has already attained the highest estate
which God has appointed to man generally. This man is Jesus, the
Son. Jesus accepted man's low estate, a condition described by the
psalmist as being "lower than the angels" (vs. 7). He did this
"that by the the grace of God he might taste death for every one"
— that is, thoroughly to identify himself with man even in the ex-
tremity of "death" (vs. 9). Because Jesus accepted this humble
estate of man he was "crowned with glory and honor." Identifica-
tion with man in death involves identification with him in the high
estate which God intended for him. This, it should be noted, is ex-
actly the logic followed by Paul in Philippians 2:5-11. But the
logic of redemption works also in reverse. As Jesus is identified
with man, so man is identified with him. The experiences of each
become the experiences of the other; by the grace of God, Jesus
Christ tastes of death on behalf of everyone, and so everyone ex-
periences salvation through him.

HEBREWS 2:10-13 27

Identification of the Son with the Sons (2:10-13)

The author now argues for the necessity of the Son's humilia-
tion if he would become the Savior of men. His basic assumption
is that an essential unity between Savior and saved is necessary in
order that the end in view may be accomplished. The best expres-
sion of the principle is found in verse 18 : "Because he himself has
suffered and been tempted, he is able to help those who are
tempted." The justification for this principle of a unifying experi-
ence as necessary for Redeemer and redeemed no doubt lies in the
prophetic ideas of "corporate personahty" and of the corporate
nature of experience. In neither Old nor New Testament does the
individual stand alone. Rather he is conceived at all times as being
a part of a larger group — ^the nation in the Old Testament, the
Christian fellowship ia the New Testament. If the individual is to
be saved, therefore, he wiU be saved as a member of the group,
and similarly the Savior is one who arises out of the group and is
one with it in experience.

It is in the light of this principle that the author declares it "fit-
ting" that God, the Creator, "for whom and by whom aU things
exist," should mature Jesus as man's Savior by a process of suf-
fering. Salvation here is spoken of as man's being brought "to
glory" (vs. 10) . The word is used because of its appearance in the
Psalm quoted in verse 7. "Glory and honor" represent the exalted
position of viceroyalty which God has purposed for man. It is a
condition in which man as the "image" of God (Gen. 1:26) re-
flects the latter's power and personahty as his appointed viceroy.
Jesus as the Mediator of this experience to man is called "the pio-
neer of their salvation." Sometimes the Greek word employed
here is translated "captain" or "leader." In any case, the picture is
of one who, as a member of the fellowship, moves ahead, leading
the way to ever higher ground of experience. This progressive ex-
perience is termed by the author a maturing one ("perfect"; see
also 5:9, 14; 6: 1; 7:28; 9:9). The language suggests the maturing
of the individual person to adulthood and impUes successive
stages of growth. It is a matter of common experience that with-
out "suffering" such maturing is not possible in the world as we
know it

Paul places stress upon man's justification in the sight of God;
Hebrews lays more emphasis upon man's consecration or sanctifi-
cation. This is no doubt because the Savior's function which the

28 HEBREWS 2:14-16

author wishes to stress is that of "High Priest," and such terms as
"sanctification," "holiness," and "consecration" are those which
normally applied to the work of the high priest. Both the sanctify-
ing High Priest and the people whom he prepares for the worship
of God are said to "have all one origin"; that is to say, they have
a community of experience in their common humanity (vs. 11).
In proof of this essential unity between Savior and saved, the
author calls upon three passages of Scripture in which the princi-
ple is presented. The first of these is Psalm 22:22, a so-called
"Servant" Psalm. This is a Psalm in which is pictured the "Suffer-
ing Servant of the Lord" in much the same fashion as that re-
deeming figure is described in Second Isaiah. The Psalm is one
of the most frequently quoted in the New Testament, first in Mat-
thew 27 and Mark 15 in describing the agony of the Cross, and
thereafter by the various New Testament writers in appropriate
contexts. Hebrews therefore is following in the usual tradition of
the Early Church in identifying Jesus with the "Suffering Servant"
who saves by vicariously assuming the suffering and death com-
mon to all mankind. The second and third quotations, in verse 13,
are from Isaiah 8: 17-18. There the prophet and his followers are
declared to be the "signs and portents" of the working of God in
Israel, a prefiguring of God's saving activity on behalf of man
through Jesus and the fellowship which clusters about him in the
Christian Church.

The Sons' Condition of Slavery (2:14-16)

The author now repeats what he had already said in verse 1 1 to
the effect that Savior and saved "have all one origin," or as he
now phrases it, "share in flesh and blood." He now adds, how-
ever, the ultimate purpose of this identification with mankind —
namely, the destruction of "the devil" and the deliverance of man
from "fear of death." Death is generally conceived in Scripture as
man's last great enemy (Gen. 2:17; I Cor. 15:26; Rev. 20:14).
The opposite of death is life or salvation, and this is always con-
ceived of as the gift of God and under his power. Naturally, there-
fore, death belongs to the kingdom of Satan or the Devil, and it
represents his final power over man. The nearest scriptural paral-
lel to the series of ideas with which our author is working at this
point (flesh and blood, death, the Devil, lifelong bondage) is to be
found in Paul's treatment of the kindred theme in various pas-
sages in Romans (5:12-21; 6:1-11; 7:1-5; 8:1-39).

HEBREWS 2:17-18 29

There now follows a repetition of much the same thought as we
have already seen in verse 5 above — "it is not with angels that he
is concerned but with the descendants of Abraham" (vs. 16). Be-
tween the two verses, however, there has been a marked advance
in thought, and in consequence the mode of expression exhibits
two striking differences. First, in verse 5 and following, as we have
seen, it was of man in general that the author spoke, and the con-
trast was a general one between angels and mankind. Here, on the
other hand, the contrast is between angels and "the descendants of
Abraham." Second, in verse 16 the thought is expressed in the
language of Isaiah 41:8-9, in which the descendants of Abraham
are identified with the Servant of the Lord.

Consequence for the Son (2:17-18)

The author finally draws the conclusion (which he has already
mentioned in vss. 10 and 14 above) of the necessity of identifica-
tion on the part of the Savior and his "brethren." This identifica-
tion is necessary if the end in view is to be accomplished. Now,
however, for the first time he states that end in terms of the high-
priestly work of Christ, and so begins to sound the greatest note
of the letter as a whole. The "merciful" character of this High
Priest will find expression in 4:14-16 and 5:1-10. His "faithful"
character is the subject of 3:l-6a. It is characteristic of the style
of Hebrews to introduce in this way items of interest which will
later receive fuller development at tie author's hands.

"To make expiation" for sin is not again mentioned in the letter
in so many words. However, expiation was the task of the high
priest on the Day of Atonement, and that service is elaborated at
considerable length in 8:1 — 10:18. "Expiation" is essentially the
removal of stumbling blocks between persons, in this case the
stumbling block of sin between God and man. The principle of
identification between Jesus as High Priest and man goes only so
far as his being "tempted," not sinning. On this point the author
is very insistent (see 4:15; 7:26).

30 HEBREWS 3:l-6a

THE GOSPEL CALL TO BECOME GOD'S HOUSE

Hebrews 3:1 — 4:16

The Son's Faithfulness Over God's House (3:1-63)

Worship of God requires a house of worship. The author there-
fore now introduces us to the thought that God through Jesus
Christ calls unto himself the people who shall constitute such a
living house of worship. This call is a "heavenly" one; that is to
say, it has a divine origin (vs. 1 ) , "heaven" often appearing in the
contemporary Judaism as a substitute for the name of God him-
self. The Christian readers who have experienced this call are now
called "holy," that is, consecrated or dedicated to the service of
God.

The author wishes to stress the faithful character of Jesus Christ,
through whom the call comes to man to become God's house. The
latter part of verse 1 might well be translated: "Will you give
your attention to the one sent to be High Priest (as we confess
him to be), that is, to Jesus?" This is the second time that the
historical name "Jesus" has been mentioned by the author (see
2:9), and in both cases it is in connection with the incarnate life
and ministry and designated service which Jesus has performed
on behalf of man. Nowhere else in the New Testament is Jesus
called "apostle." The English word is a slight modification of the
Greek, and both together have behind them a Hebrew term em-
ployed only of a special messenger who carries with him the full
authority of the one sending. Jesus, accordingly, as High Priest
comes to us with all the authority of God himself, and the author's
present point is that he has proved "faithful" in his exercise of
this authority (vs. 2).

Moses, too, was one sent upon a special mission by God, and
he was faithful in fulfilling the service appointed to him; but by
comparison with Christ's function that of Moses was a menial
one, as is shown by the word "servant" (vs. 5) employed in Num-
bers 12:7, which our author is quoting here. The choice of Moses
in this connection for purposes of comparison is the obvious one,
since it was through Moses as leader tiiat God constituted Israel
as his people at the Exodus. On the occasion of the choice of a
new promised land God has chosen Moses' opposite — Jesus

HEBREWS 3:6b-15 31

Christ. But here the comparison ends, for whereas Moses was
merely a "servant," Jesus Christ is "a son" (vs. 6) , through whom
as God's Mediator all things are accomplished (see 1:2). Jesus
Christ is the Creator, or as is said here, "the builder of a [the]
house" (vs. 3). The builder is, of course, God himself (vs. 4),
but the author in his thinking has long since brought Christ into
union with God as Son (vs. 6; see 1 : 1-4).

The contrast between the two figures runs throughout this sec^
tion. Both are pronounced faithful in their several spheres of serv-
ice, but Moses is to be kept in his place. He was faithful, but as
a servant only; Christ is also faithful, but "as a son." Moses was
faithful "in God's house"; Christ is faithful "over God's house."
This contrast between Moses and Jesus Christ is clearly indicative
of the temptation to which the readers of this letter are exposed.
It has to do without doubt with the character of the revelation
represented on the one hand and the other by Moses and Jesus
Christ. As clearly as in the letters of Paul, Moses here stands for
Law, Christ for grace. Paul, it is true, was interested primarily in
the ethical side of the Law, whereas Hebrews' main interest lies in
the ritual side. But this is probably because of the particular na-
ture of the problem presented by the readers of Hebrews, for
there can be no doubt that they were being attracted by the claims
of the Qumran sect to represent the "people of the covenant" im-
der Moses (see Introduction). For the moment, by way of reply
to this the author contents himself with the remark that Moses'
highest function was "to testify to the things that were to be
spoken later," that is, to those things which characterized the sav-
ing activity of Jesus Christ as great High Priest (vs. 5). Moses
was, therefore, to be superseded by God's "son."

The Thrice-Repeated Gospel Call (3:6b— 4:16)
Urgency of the Call and Steadfastness Required (3:61>-i5)

If faithfulness was required of the Son, it is also required of the
"sons." This generally is the main theme of the sections which fol-
low in chapters 3 and 4, in which the author in an almost inex-
tricable fashion mixes instruction and exhortation.

He begins with the assurance that Christians are "God's house"
provided they fulfill certain conditions. There is a remarkable un-
derlying sense of the unity between the Hebrew people and the
Christian Church at this point which must not be overlooked. Both

32 HEBREWS 3 :6b- 15

Moses and Christ had been said above to have been faithful with
reference to "God's house" (vss. 5-6) . It is startling, immediately
following that discussion, to read that Christians are this house,
that is, they are the people of God (vs. 6b; see also Eph. 2:19,
22). Underiying this contention is clearly the idea that God has
been for centuries calling out a people for himself. Accordingly,
it should be clear that the "call" is for the people who hear it,
whether Jews or Christians; that the required response to the
call is one of faith or faithfulness; and that the resultant people
responding to this call are one. In the sections which follow, the
unity of the call and of its essential message, or gospel, is to prove
one of its most notable features.

The "hope" (vs. 6b) in which Christians are to find "confi-
dence" and "pride" is of an eschatological nature (6:18-20),
which is to say that essentially it refers to the completion and ac-
ceptance of Christ's saving work by God in the eternal order.

The author, as is his custom, bases his entire argument in this
section upon a passage from the Old Testament, Psahn 95:7-11.
This Psalm was one regularly employed in the synagogue in con-
nection with worship on the Sabbath (the Hebrew word meaning
"rest"). This was appropriate in view of the Psalm's stress upon
the subject of "rest" and the possibility of God's people entering
with him into "rest." It serves the author's purpose admirably also
inasmuch as "sabbath" or "rest" was one of the terms employed
by the Jews for "salvation." Moreover, the Psalm with its refer-
ence to the wandering in the wilderness under the leadership of
Moses lent itself to a comparison of the two faithfulnesses here
involved — ^that of the leaders, Moses and Christ, on the one hand,
and that of the people of God on the other.

The original events referred to in the Psahn are those involving
the murmuring of the people of Israel when confronted with lack
of food and proper drinking water in the wilderness (Exod. 15:
23-24; 17:7; Num. 20:2-5). The Psahn also illustrates the note
of urgency that is struck whenever God's voice is heard, in view
of the striking manner in which the quotation begins — "Today."
"But exhort one another every day," says our author, "as long as
it is called 'today' " (vs. 13). The urgency of the call arises in
every case out of two factors — ^first, God speaks to each genera-
tion calling it to himself; second, the response is required on the
day on which it is heard. Moreover, in this and the following sec-
tions the responsibiUty of man for response to the divine call is

HEBREWS 3:16 — 4:10 33

emphasized throughout. If men do not respond, it is because they

harden their hearts against God's call; it is because they test and : .

try him; it is because they "always go astray in their hearts"; it is

because they have not known God's ways (vs. 10). God holds ■ •

every generation accountable for such failure. The source of such

an attitude is "an evil, unbeUeving heart," and its end is to "fall

away from the Uving God" (vs. 12).

On the other hand, the promise is held out that we shall "share
in Christ," or become partakers or feUows with him, in the privi-
leges which are his as Son over God's house, provided "we hold
our first confidence firm to the end" (vs. 14). God demands
steadfastness, confidence, assurance, and faithfulness of his people
at aU times. t '

Failure of Israel at the First Call (3:16-19) |

On at least three occasions the divine "call" has been given to [

man to become God's people. The first of these is that referred to ; ,

in the Psalm which has just been quoted. The people involved are [ •

the Israelites, and the occasion is the Exodus from Egypt (vs. 16) . ; ,

The author's major concern here is to place the blame for Israel's ' '

failure to receive the promised "rest" squarely where it belongs, t

namely, upon Israel and her sin. He advances from stage to stage !

in his argument by means of question and answer. His argument \

may be stated in positive fashion as foUows: (1) there need be i

no question about God's first call having been heard; Scripture
makes it clear that those involved both heard and rebelled against
the call (vs. 16a); (2) the group concerned included the entire
Israelitish people who came up out of Egypt under Moses (vs.
16b); (3) for forty years God was provoked by their clear atti-
tude of rebeUion (vs. 17a) ; (4) their "bodies fell in the wilder-
ness" on account of their sin (vs. 17b); (5) God properly pun-
ished their disobedience, swearing that that generation "should
never enter his rest" (vs. 18); (6) it is clear, therefore, that the
generation concerned were properly punished on account of their
"unbeHef (vs, 19).

Openness of the Promise Shown by the Second Call (4:1-10)

The argument now shows that the promised "rest" is stiU avail-
able for the people of God. This conclusion is drawn in 4:9: "So
then, there remains a sabbath rest for the people of God." The
passage begins as a hortatory section — "let us fear lest any of you

34 HEBREWS 4:1-10

be judged to have failed to reach" God's rest (vs. 1). On the
whole, however, it is a doctrinal section, and this also appears in
verse 1 ("while the promise of entering his rest remains"). There
is obviously here the underlying assumption that, when God gives
a promise, it is bound to be fulfilled at some time or other. If this
does not occur in the lifetime of the immediate generation to
which the promise is spoken, then it remains open to be received
by some future generation. In this expectation is seen a sense of
continuity between the Old and New Covenants hke that to which
reference has already been made in previous sections (1:1-4;
3:l-6a).

This assumption has ground in the Psalm (Ps. 95) which is em-
ployed here. In fact, the author sees in the repetition of the call
in the Psalm a clear indication that the promise is still available to
the people of God. Fundamentally, to say that the promise re-
mains open until it is fulfilled is to say that God is the "living"
God (vs. 12) and that he is "faithful," faithful to fulfill his prom-
ises (10:23; 11:11).

The generation to which the author writes represents a third
occasion on which the promise is opened to man. There are thus
three stages in the presentation of the promise, as follows: first, to
the Moses- Joshua generation (3:16; 4:8), second, to the genera-
tion of those to whom the Psalm was addressed (3:7; 4:7), and
third, to the Christian community (4:2, 9, 11).

In view of the nature of the argument here, a more definitive
phrase than "good news" for the contents of the promise is re-
quired (vs. 2). Actually, the Greek at this point reads, "for we
also have been evangelized even as they." The verb ("evangel-
ized") has a long history behind it in both Hebrew and Greek,
and long before the Christian era it had acquired a technical con-
notation, being applied specifically to the preaching of the mes-
sage of God's redemptive activity on behalf of man. This mean-
ing of the verb is found in its final Old Testament development in
Second Isaiah in such a passage as 52:7. It is easy to see that the
"good tidings" there (that "God reigns") becomes in Matthew
4:23 "the gospel of the kingdom" and in Luke 4:18 the "good
news to the poor." Then, too, the very nature of the argument in
Hebrews that the promise remains open requires that the "good
news" announced on each occasion shall be essentially the same.
Otherwise the argument has no validity.

It is invalid to object to such reasoning on the ground that the

HEBREWS 4:1-10 35

promise formerly given through Moses and Joshua had to do with
the acquisition of a land, whereas the promise through Christ re-
fers to eternal salvation. Such a compartmentalizing of human
experience is foreign to the thought of Scripture, where there is
rather a sense of the oneness of hfe and experience as a whole.
God is interested in and concerned about the salvation of that
whole. Accordingly, in the Scriptures, God's promise to save man
in any part of his being involves his being saved in every part. The
author, therefore, sees no incongruity in conceiving of the prom-
ise through Moses and Joshua, through David, and through Jesus
Christ as representing essentially the same gospel message of God's
redemptive love.

For much the same reason, perhaps we should accept the al-
ternate reading given in the margin for the second half of verse 2,
rather than that found in the text: "the message which they heard
did not benefit them, because they were not united in faith with
those who heard." The passage is as difficult to understand in the
Greek as in the English, but the margin seems to have the best
evidence in its favor. If adopted, it should be understood to refer
to the fact that faith is the required normative response to the gos-
pel promise, and that such faith unites in a great fellowship down
the centuries those who receive the salvation offered in the gospel.
The next verse would seem to support this view: "For we who
have believed" enter into that fellowship and enjoy the common
rest because we are "united in faith with those who heard" and
accepted it.

Verses 3 and 4 elaborate the idea of God's "rest" by drawing
upon the Genesis account of the seven days of creation (Gen. 1).
The seventh day of the creation week was the day of rest for God
(Gen. 2:2) — God's "sabbath." This period of rest may be thought
of also as that salvation into which God calls men to enter with
himself (vss. 4-5; see also Ps. 95: 11). A word of warning should
be sounded perhaps at this point, lest the idea that salvation in-
volves enjoying the rest of God and that man "ceases from his
labors as God did from his" (vs. 10) should be so interpreted as
to suggest that in the future life Christians will have nothing what-
ever to do! Such an entire cessation of activity is nowhere taught
in Scripture with regard to either God or man. In Jewish thought,
"sabbath" stood for serenity, peace, and harmonious enjoyment of
the works of creation on the part of both God and man. For the
Jew the Sabbath has always been a day of joyful experience of all

36 HEBREWS 4:11-16

the good things that God has made. Fasting and mourning on this
day are forbidden by rabbinic law. It is a day for luxurious liv-
ing, for calling in one's friends to enjoy a meal, for dressing up in
one's best, and for expressing generally the delights of godly liv-
ing. There can be no doubt, therefore, that when our author speaks
of ceasing from labor, it is this sort of experience that he has in
mind, contrasted with the fretting and anxiety attending the usual
occupations of six days of the week.

Exhortation to Response at the Third "Call" (4:11-16)

Again exhortation and doctrine are mingled together. The sec-
tion opens with exhortation: the need for the human response of
the "sons" to the divine call is a constant emphasis in this book.
We have already observed this at 3:6, 12 and at 4:1; we shall
meet with it again (see 6:1-8). Moreover, the "disobedience," or
alternatively the "unbelief" (3:19) which caused it, is held up as
a warning to those who experience God's third call through Jesus
Christ (vs. 11).

The discerning power of the "word of God" is presented as a
first stimulus to the response required of sons (vs. 12). Only here
and in 13:7 does the phrase "the word of God" appear in this let-
ter. But its equivalent is found in such phrases as "the promise"
(4:1), "good news" (4:2), "the message which they heard" (4:2),
"the elementary doctrines of Christ" (6:1), and possibly others.
This, then, is the gospel message, and our author unites with it
a number of participles and adjectives by way of defining its func-
tion and power. To begin with he says that it is "living," a favorite
expression of his intended to indicate at once the power and the
relevance of various aspects of the Christian faith.

The adjectives and participles which follow serve to show how
this living word of God functions in relation to those to whom it
comes. Because it is living, it is therefore "active," being "sharper
than any two-edged sword." We are reminded of the Suffering
Servant's description of himself in Isaiah 49:2 — "He made my
mouth Uke a sharp sword." In Revelation 1:16 the exalted Christ
is also said to have "a sharp two-edged sword" proceeding from
his mouth. The expression is a figurative one, indicative no doubt
of the saving and condemning or judging aspects of the word, ac-
cording as it is received or rejected by those who hear. Moreover,
the activity of the word takes the form of "piercing to the division
of soul and spirit, of joints and marrow," that is, of thoroughly

HEBREWS 4:11-16 37

searching out and exposing the innermost secrets of the sons of
men, a thought also expressed in the words "discerning the
thoughts and intentions of the heart." This discerning function of
the word is picturesquely indicated by saying that "all are . . . laid
bare" before God, an expression which refers to the twisting of
the neck of the victim in sacrifice in order that the knife may be
inserted, or to the bending back of the head of an opponent in a
wrestling bout (vs. 13).

A second inducement to Christians to respond to the third gos-
pel call which they have heard is to be found in the gracious char-
acter of the Son as "high priest" (vss. 14-16). This is the third
time the author has used this term with reference to our Lord. In
the two previous passages (2:17; 3:1) it was his faithfulness in per-
forming the function assigned to him by God that was stressed.
But now a new factor is brought into prominence, that of his rich
experience. For he "has passed through the heavens" (vs. 14). This
idea no doubt is related to that expressed in 2:9 where we saw
him "crowned with glory and honor." But here for the first time
there is a suggestion of his return to earth with a view to the sav-
ing of his people. The Jewish high priest went into the sanctuary
of Tabernacle and Temple and then came out to bless the people
at prayer. Jesus Christ as our High Priest does the same; he, too,
returns from the sanctuary on high that he may take hold of our
hands and lead us "near to the throne of grace" (vs. 16).

The phrase "yet without sinning" (vs. 15) should be strength-
ened. The Greek reads "without sin," and is to be equated with
the parallel passage at 7:26 — "separated from sinners, exalted
above the heavens." Probably in both these places the reference is
to the difference which sin makes in human experience. The au-
thor, then, wishes to say that Jesus was tempted in every way that
man is, except for those ways in which sin itself determines the
nature of the temptation. He had never given in to sin, and con-
sequently he could not even be tempted as those who have once
succumbed to sin are tempted.

38 HEBREWS 5:1-4

THE NATURE OF THE SON'S HIGH PRIESTHOOD

Hebrews 5:1 — 7:28

Qualifications of a High Priest (5:1-10)

Appointment and Humanity (5:1-4)

We have now arrived at the central and most important section
of the letter, that which deals with the nature of the Son's high
priesthood and with his work. These two subjects will occupy five
and a half chapters, or a bit more than two-fifths of the book.

In the present section the author selects for his purpose two
qualifications of the high priest — namely, his divine appointment
and his humanity. The high priest, he points out, is from the side
of man and is to act for man, even as the prophet was from the
side of God and was appointed to act as God's spokesman (vs. 1).
The high priest thus becomes a true representative of man before
God, "since he himself is beset with weakness" such as is experi-
enced by aU men. The high priest is human, because he shares the
weakness of the men whom he represents before God. He is him-
self a sinner and "is bound to offer sacrifice for his own sins as
well as for those of the people" (vs. 3).

Actually the only day in the entire Jewish year when it was in-
cumbent upon the high priest to offer sacrifices was the Day of
Atonement (Lev. 16). On this day the high priest offered a bull
"as a sin offering for himself . . . and for his house" (Lev. 16:6).
"Some of the blood of the buU" he took and sprinkled on the
mercy seat in the Holy of HoUes (Lev. 16:14). Only thereafter was
he qualified to kill "the goat of the sin offering which is for the
people" and to take "its blood within the veil," sprinkling it upon
the mercy seat in the Holy of HoUes (Lev. 16:15). In the Jewish
Mishnah (the law book which gives us a view of the contemporary
Jewish customs) one entire book is devoted to the exact manner
of the high priest's functioning on the Day of Atonement. And
both Old Testament and Mishnah paint for us a striking picture
in accord with Hebrews' delineation of the high priest and his
work: he is a servant of the people, acting on their behalf, and one
with them in standing in need of forgiveness and salvation.

The present passage abounds with references of an accurate
nature, showing a good knowledge of Jewish law. For example,

HEBREWS 5:5-10 39

the "gifts and sacrifices" of verse 1 are probably the "cereal offer-
ing" and "flesh" sacrifices specified under the Law (Lev. 2:1, 4;
7:12, 15-18). Again, it is likely that "the ignorant and wayward"
specifies the two classes of sinners recognized under the Law —
namely, those who committed offenses against the Law through
ignorance (Lev. 4:2; 5:14, 17), and sinners "with a high hand,"
that is, those who voluntarily disobeyed the Law although it was
known to them (Num. 15:30).

The second qualification of the high priest is that of divine ap-
pointment (vss. 1, 4). Actually only Aaron among Jewish high
priests was personally called by God (Exod. 28:1). Thereafter, the
high priest was a member of the tribe of Levi, which was descended
lineally from Aaron. But the selection of a particular high priest
was confused throughout the history of Judaism following the
Exile. Under the Maccabean princes, for example, the high priest-
hood had been seized as the prerogative of the ruling house. Un-
der the Romans, the high priest was often appointed by the pro-
vincial government of Judea. Actually his inauguration was ac-
compHshed either by anointing or by investiture.

The Jews generally accepted as high priest one drawn from the
tribe of Levi, and therefore they recognized such a one as quali-
fied for the office by the mere fact of birth. The author of He-
brews suggests that the High Priest acknowledged by the Chris-
tian Church is one who occupies the office with the same high
qualification enjoyed by Aaron at its inception — the call of God
alone.

Fulfillment by the Son (5:5-10)

The author now shows that the two qualifications of high priest-
hood above indicated (humanity and the divine call) are both ful-
filled in the case of Jesus Christ. In asserting the divine appoint-
ment, the author makes use of two royal Psalms (Pss. 2:7 and
110:4). The first of the quotations ("Thou art my Son, today I
have begotten thee") probably is intended to have reference to the
voice which spoke from heaven to Jesus at his baptism. However,
as reported by Mark (1:11) that voice employed only the first part
of the quotation from Psalm 2:7 ("Thou art my . . . Son"), sub-
stituting for the second part of the verse a clause from the Greek
translation of Isaiah 42:1 ("my beloved, in whom I am well
pleased"). For the quotation from Isaiah, which refers to the ordi-
nation of the Suffering Servant, Hebrews substitutes Psalm 1 10:4

40 HEBREWS 5:5-10

("Thou art a priest for ever, after the order of Melchizedek"). It
seems certain that Jesus applied Psahn 110 to himself (see Mark
12:36). Possibly, therefore, the author of Hebrews understood
Jesus to mean that the eternal Father had used the words of this
Psahn in speaking to his eternal Son, applying their significance to
him.

The author wishes to say that our Lord was himself aware of
appointment from God as high-priestly Messiah. Jesus did not
choose these high ofl&ces for himself. But equally he was not un-
aware of his divine appointment. He had good reason, as he was
addressed by the heavenly voice, to know himself both Messiah
and High Priest of his people.

The second qualification for the high priesthood (humanity) was
also met by Jesus Christ. For although, as we have already seen,
he was in his essential being Son of God (1:1-4), nonetheless he
*'learned obedience through what he suffered" (5:8). In this con-
nection Hebrews lays particular stress upon the "prayers and sup-
plications, with loud cries and tears" which Jesus offered "to him
who was able to save him from death" (vs. 7). Undoubtedly the
reference here is particularly to the Gethsemane experience (Matt.
26:36-46). Our author conceives of Jesus as having been "heard
for his godly fear" (vs. 7) on this occasion, a reference to the na-
ture of Jesus' prayer, which was to the effect that his Father's
will and not his own should be accomplished. The resignation of
man's will to God is a fundamental characteristic of "godly fear"
in the biblical sense of that term (Gen. 3:17; Heb. 3:16; 4:6, 11).
That Jesus "learned obedience" through his sufferings is a charac-
teristic teaching also of the Apostle Paul (Phil. 2:5-11).

The phrase "made perfect" (vs. 9) has the sense in the Greek
of "having attained a previously determined goal." The meaning
here is that Jesus obediently accepted the suffering which was laid
upon him by the sinful condition of the world into which, at the
Father's command, he had entered. The result of this utter obedi-
ence to his Father regardless of cost was our Lord's maturing to
the point where he became worthy of being "the source of eternal
salvation to aU who obey him" (vs. 9). There is no indication in
verse 10 of the point of time at which Jesus was "designated by
God a high priest after the order of Melchizedek," but the logic
of the author's argument would suggest that such designation was
the result of the obedience and the consequent maturing process
which has just been described. It has been suggested that God's

HEBREWS 5:11-14 41

appointment of Jesus as High Priest came at the Ascension and
was synchronous with his entrance into the heavenly tabernacle.
Such a view, however, probably goes beyond the chronological
interest of the author. Rather, the logical sequence is what he is
concerned to stress here.

Qualificatioiis of Mature Sons (5:11 — 6:20)

Teachers of the Word of Righteousness (5:11-14)

This long section (5:11 — 6:20) disrupts the author's descrip-
tion of the Son's high priesthood. Verse 10 is clearly repeated at
6:20, and thereafter the argument is taken up in chapter 7. This
is, however, in accordance with the author's general plan of ming-
ling hortatory with didactic sections in his letter. Further, it has
the effect once again of throwing into relief the contrast between
"Son" and "sons" which runs through the letter.

It is quite apparent from the description of the author's readers
that they are by no means new converts. Considerable time has
elapsed since they became Christians, and "by this time" they
should themselves have been ready to become teachers of others.
He is keenly disappointed to discover that again they require to
be taught "the first principles of God's word" (vs. 12). The word
translated "principles" here is the common Greek expression
equivalent to our English ABC's and was applied in similar
fashion to the rudiments of any branch of learning. The branch
here intended is in verse 1 1 called in the Greek simply "the word"
("much to say"). In verse 13 it becomes "the word of righteous-
ness" and in 6:1, "the elementary doctrines of Christ" or, as the
Greek has it, "the elementary word of Christ." This is certainly
to be identified with "the message which they heard" (4:2) and
"the word of God" (4:12), and consequently with the gospel,
which was under discussion in chapters 3 and 4.

The message which the author says he is concerned to trans-
mit to his readers is "the word of righteousness" (vs. 13). This is
a word which, as he remarks, is fit not for a "child" but rather
"for the mature." His general meaning here is clear, but his use
of the qualifying phrase "of righteousness" is the more striking
inasmuch as it is not a common one in this letter. We have seen
the word "righteousness" thus far only in 1:9, where it was em-
ployed in connection with the description of the eternal Christ
who loves righteousness and hates iniquity. It is perhaps significant

k

42 HEBREWS 6:1-8

that the next passage in which the word is used is at 7:2, where
the author translates Melchizedek as "king of righteousness." Ob-
viously teaching with regard to such a high priest might well be
termed "the word of righteousness." But the author is also aware
of "the righteousness which comes by faith" (11:7; 12:11). More-
over, the mature who are ready to receive such a word are those
who, according to the author, "have their faculties trained by
practice to distinguish good from evil." Perhaps, therefore, we
should see in the use of the term here a reference to the total de-
mand of God upon human life, which elsewhere in Scripture is
termed "righteousness" (see Matt. 3:15).

Nonfulfillment by the Sons (6:i-8)

In this passage "the elementary doctrines of Christ" which the
readers are exhorted to leave behind are basic theological doc-
trines which may be said to form a convenient summary of a
well-rounded theology and may very well have constituted the
substance of early catechetical teaching given to new converts.
These, says our author, are merely the food of babes in Christ.
The maturity, then, of which the author speaks (vs. 1) constitutes
something for the Christian which, while based upon theology,
goes beyond it. And we are left in no doubt as to what this further
aspect of the Christian life is. For in verse 7 he presents us with
a parable of a fruitful land which takes advantage of every gift of
God's providence as it comes and "brings forth vegetation useful
to those for whose sake it is cultivated." There can be no doubt
that the fruitage which is suggested here is the Christian life and
character which, in the teachings of both Jesus and Paul, are the
natural fruitage of theological teaching and its associated spiritual
experience (Matt. 5:16; Rom. 12:1-2; Gal. 5:22-25).

It is not without significance that the author in this section gives
us two lists of the "elementary doctrines of Christ" — one of these
a series of catechetical statements, as we have just remarked; the
other a series of experiences had by the new convert. The first
series, it will be noted, includes (1) those relating to the initial
experiences of the Christian Ufe: "repentance from dead works,"
"faith toward God," "instruction about ablutions," and "the lay-
ing on of hands"; and (2) those pertaining to the future: the
"resurrection of the dead" and "eternal judgment" (vss. 1-2). The
second series is intended to match this one with a list of experi-
ences of which the readers are aware. In this series also perhaps

HEBREWS 6:9-20 43

we should see two sub-classes — ( 1 ) those pertaining to the initial
experience of the Christian life: "repentance," enUghtenment (a
common synonym for baptism in the Early Church), tasting of
"the heavenly gift," and becoming "partakers of the Holy Spirit,"
which perhaps should be equated with the "laying on of hands"
above; and (2) those which relate to the realm of eschatology:
the tasting of "the goodness of the word of God" and "the powers
of the age to come" (vss. 4-5). It is not possible to push the simi-
larity between the two hsts to the point of exact parallelism. The
author's desire is simply to warn his readers of the importance of
advancing to maturity in their Christian lives.

This passage has been a great theological battleground. Some
find in the passage proof of the doctrine of "backsliding," whereas
others poiot out that the author specifically teaches that repent-
ance after such presumptive backsliding is impossible. It should
be noted, therefore, that the passage really suits neither group.
On the one hand, it may be suggested that the "apostasy" re-
ferred to in verse 6 is a hypothetical one, found in a hortatory
passage, and intended merely as a warning to the readers (see
also vs. 8). On the other hand, it is to be remarked that the
author only says that "it is impossible to restore again to re-
pentance" such as continually crucify the Son of God ("since
they crucify the Son of God"). The tense of the Greek verb here
suggests that, "as long as men crucify the Son of God on their
own account and hold him up to contempt," they are not in a con-
dition to repent

In this passage, as previously (1:1-4), it is clear that for the
author two ages overlap. Christians already to some extent are
living in the "age to come" and experiencing its powers (vs. 5),
while the works of which they have repented are those pertaining
to the sphere of death (vs. 1), particularly those of a ritualistic
nature attaching to the old cult (9: 14). It is this contact with the
coming age and the powers which pertain to it that arouses the
expectancy of the author that his Christian readers may indeed
advance to maturity. This idea is expUcitly brought out in the
next section.

Guaranteed by God Through His High-Priestly Son (6:9-20)

It was noted above that the "apostasy" against which our au-
thor warned his readers was of a hypothetical nature (vss. 4-6).
That this is true so far as the author's readers are concerned is

44 HEBREWS 6:9-20

now made doubly clear by his words in verse 9 — "in your case,
beloved, we feel sure of better things that belong to salvation"
(see also 10:39). It may seem strange that he can both utter such
words of assurance and in no uncertain terms warn his readers
of the dangers of apostasy. And yet Christians always stand in
such a position of jeopardy while in the world of human affairs.
Like the father at the foot of the Mount of Transfiguration they
are constrained to cry out, "I believe," and then in the next half
breath, "help my unbelief!" (Mark 9:24). The Christian walk is
always to be expressed both in the indicative mood and in the
mood of command or entreaty. Paul gives ample expression to
these two features in Romans 6:2-11.

In the present instance the two factors referred to are clearly
evidenced in our author's argument. First, corresponding to the
"I believe" or indicative statement of the case for the Christian,
our author calls attention to "your work and the love which you
showed for his sake in serving the saints, as you stiU do" (vs. 10).
The "work" referred to here is not to be confused with "good
works" under the Law. As we have seen, our author refers to
those as "dead works," that is, works which are not characterized
by the life or living character experienced by the saved (vs. 1;
9:14). This "work" is rather the product of the Christian's ex-
perience of the Holy Spirit and "the powers of the age to come"
which he has already mentioned (vss. 4 and 5). The "love" to
which he refers is intended as a further definition of "your work,"
the two expressions used together to express a single idea. This
brotherly love must have been a particularly strong characteristic
of the community addressed in this letter, as the author refers to
it again (13:1).

But the second factor — the need for an imperative — is also
applicable to the readers' condition. For there is a "hope" which
still Ues ahead (vs. 11). This hope is akin to, if not identical with,
the old "promises" of God to his people under the Old Covenant
(vs. 12). Accordingly, "earnestness in realizing the full assurance
of hope" and in becoming "imitators of those who through faith
and patience inherit the promises" is called for.

The four words which stand out in connection with this side
of the matter are obviously "faith," "patience," "promises," and
"hope." Individually and collectively these four words serve to
stress the fact that in the last analysis salvation lies with God and
is guaranteed by him alone. Left to themselves, the "sons" are

HEBREWS 6:9-20 45

unable to fulfill the qualifications demanded of the mature. This is
the work of God accomplished through his high-priestly Son.

Indeed, it is now apparent that the Christian life must be repre-
sented as an eUipse whose two foci are respectively the Cross
(2:9) and the Second Coming (9:28). These represent in tem-
poral terms the past and future redemptive activity of God, its
historical and eternal aspects. In the present section the author is
concerned to stress particulariy the future focus of the Christian
life (vss. 18-20).

"Hope" in this author's vocabulary is by no means a weak af-
fair. Rather it is a veritable "anchor of the soul." It is an objective
reality, not merely a subjective whim. It is the very work of Christ
as he presents his sacrificed body before God in the eternal sanc-
tuary. The language of this passage ("inner shrine," "curtain,"
"high priest") plunges us into the midst of a new subject which
goes far beyond the foundation thus far laid down. Further ex-
planation, therefore, must await such passages as 8:1-5 and 9:
11-14.

To illustrate the sense in which he employs the terms "faith,"
"patience" or endurance, and "promises," the author cites the
case of Abraham and the incident of his offering of Isaac on
Mount Moriah (Gen. 22: 16-17), in which, although the elements
of faith and patience on Abraham's part are not overlooked, the
emphasis is clearly upon God's part in the transaction. The author
lays great stress upon the fact that the promise came from God to
begin with and rested upon his employing an "oath" to seal the
promise. These two, promise and oath, are "unchangeable things,
in which it is impossible that God should prove false" (vs. 18).
The argument here is essentially the same as that found in chap-
ters 3 and 4, in which "the promise of entering his rest," which
God had originally made through Moses and Joshua to the people
of Israel, must remain open for some future generation to receive,
for the reason that when God promises he always fulfills.

Essentially, then, the teaching of this section is that, although
the readers have not yet attained to the maturity required of sons,
one may rest assured that they will do so — not because of any
power residing within themselves, but because of the determined
purpose of God and the fulfillment of that purpose through the
work of Jesus Christ. As "forerunner" (vs. 20) Jesus has run on
ahead into the presence of God on our behalf. He is accordmgly
the "pioneer" of the Christian faith, and as he has planted the

46 HEBREWS 7:1-10

"anchor" of our hope within the eternal sanctuary, he is the "per-
fecter of our faith," that is, he has brought to fulfilhnent our
promised salvation.

The Son's Melchizedekian High Priesthood (7:1-28)

Supremacy of the Melchizedekian High Priesthood (7:1-10)

The author now comes to deal in a conclusive fashion with the
supremacy of the Melchizedekian high priesthood over that of the
Levitical order. And by implication the Son of God who, accord-
ing to Hebrews, belongs to the Melchizedekian order will share
in this supremacy. The author appears to argue from Melchizedek
to Christ. But lq reality he intends his argument to proceed in the
other direction, for in verse 3 he speaks of Melchizedek as "re-
sembling the Son of God." It is probably correct to say that he
has chosen Melchizedek merely because the description of him
and his oflSce found in Genesis 14:17-20 and Psalm 110:4 serves
his present purpose. The major point which he wishes to make is
that the high-priestly or sacrificial work of Christ has superseded
all the sacrifices offered under the Levitical order.

Melchizedek's very name and title suggested his close associa-
tion with God's saving purpose for man. For "righteousness'*
("zedek") and "peace" ("Salem") were two of the words com-
monly employed by the Hebrew prophets to refer to God's re-
demptive activity (vs. 2). Melchizedek, therefore, as a redemptive
figure might very appropriately be employed as a foil for Jesus
Christ, God's ultimate redemptive agent in the world.

Hebrews suggests three senses in which Melchizedek is to be
thought of as superior. Of these the first is the most important,
and it is this one in which the author finds particular (perhaps one
should say exclusive) likeness to Jesus Christ. This is the fact that
in the Genesis record Melchizedek is apparently "without father
or mother or genealogy, and has neither beginning of days nor
end of life" (vs. 3 ) . It is true that in Genesis, Melchizedek is not
described in these terms. The author of Hebrews is basing his ar-
gument upon the well-known fact that it was customary for the
author of Genesis, upon introducing any great figure, to state his
genealogy (see Gen. 5 for Noah; 11 for Abraham). Melchizedek,
as we read his story in Genesis, is an obvious exception to this
rule. He flashes, so to speak, across the stage of history hke a
meteor. He arrives without announcement, without pedigree, with-

HEBREWS 7:1-10 47

out fanfare of any sort. And having done the work which God
gave him to do, he flashes off into the night again. The author sees
him in this respect as like Jesus Christ, who came out of eternity
in the Incarnation, performed his appointed service in a short
span of years, and by his resurrection and ascension again passed
out into the eternal order. Of each of these, therefore, it may be
said that "he continues a priest for ever" (vs. 3). For where there
is neither beginning nor ending, it may be argued that there is
only continuity in the priestly office.

The second feature which places Melchizedek above the Leviti-
cal order is the fact that according to the Genesis account "Abra-
ham the patriarch gave him a tithe of the spoils" (vs. 4). The
Mosaic Law declared that only those belonging to the tribe of
Levi were to receive tithes (Num. 18:21). But it would appear
that Abraham recognized in Melchizedek a transcendent figure
worthy of receiving tithes, not because this was validated by a
law but because of his inherent worth. Moreover, it could be
argued from the Jewish point of view that all Levitical priests,
who were so to speak "still in the loins" (vs. 10) of Abraham, had
by his action conceded the right of Melchizedek to receive tithes
even from themselves! Such an argument may not appeal to us,
but there is no question that it would be acceptable among those
accustomed to rabbinical methods of logic and interpretation of
the Scriptures. The argument was based upon the assumption that
a degree of continuity is found in the successive generations of
men throughout history — a continuity which results in a certain
corporate responsibility and privilege. This principle was allowed
by the Jew in the day in which our author wrote, and indeed it
has a certain legitimacy attaching to it for any day. It is simply a
matter of common observation that what is done by one genera-
tion is done for all succeeding generations. The achievements and
mistakes made by one generation accrue to the credit or debit of
all which follow.

Hebrews' third argument in favor of Melchizedek's superiority
to the Levitical order is found in the fact that "Melchizedek . . .
met Abraham . . . and blessed him" (vs. 1). But it is a matter of
common knowledge that "the inferior is blessed by the superior"
(vs. 7). Melchizedek accordingly, it may be argued, is superior
both to Abraham and to the Levitical priesthood in his loins. Here
again is an argument drawn from the facts as stated in Genesis
which is sufficiently cogent to justify our author's choice of Mel-

48 HEBREWS 7:11-22

chizedek as a type of Christ For it is true that the greater blesses
the lesser. And again our author's argument will mean in the last
analysis that Melchizedek receives a priesthood from God which
guarantees its own validity. This priest needs no law to justify his
blessing the greatest man of God in his day. This right to bless is
inherent in the office which Melchizedek has received from God.
Man can neither add to nor subtract from the validity of such a
right.

There is even some historical justification for the choice of
Melchizedek as the proper figure preceding the Levitical priest-
hood to typify our Lord as Messiah-High Priest. The "Salem" of
which Melchizedek was king-priest was generally acknowledged
to be the predecessor of Jerusalem, which was built presumably
on the same site (see Ps. 76:2). It could be argued, therefore,
that David and his successors of Jerusalem had succeeded to the
high-priestly functions of Melchizedek of Salem and, as Jesus
himself poiuted out, David as the "messiah" of God considered
himself as having been given priestly prerogatives (Mark 2:26).
The psalmist in Psalm 110:1 is doubtless drawing upon this tradi-
tion in declaring the king of Israel to be at once messiah and high
priest of God. And the author of Hebrews, in taking over and
applying Psalm 110 to Jesus Christ — an act which is no doubt
based on Jesus' own teaching in Mark 12:36 (see 5:6 above) —
has done no more than the Early Church would have considered
legitimate. For that Church, Jesus Christ was the fulfillment of
all types and promises made under the Old Covenant. As Prophet,
Priest, and King he combined within his own function all of the
prophetic, priestly, and kingly ministries of his people.

Suspension of the Levitical Order (7:11-22)

The author now attempts to show that it was right and proper
that the Levitical priesthood should be superseded by the Mel-
chizedekian one. For "perfection" for man was obviously not
obtaiued under the Levitical priesthood and the Mosaic Law (vs.
11). This proves their general "weakness and uselessness" (vs.
18). "The law made nothing perfect" (vs. 19).

"Perfection" in this context and in succeeding ones (see 9:9;
10:1; 11: 40; 12:23) would seem to have reference to the prepara-
tion of the spirit of man for fellowship with and worship of God.
And the author's argument is that this cannot be accomplished by
law or by a priesthood established by law. Rather it is to be

HEBREWS 7:11-22 49

achieved only by that act of Jesus Christ as the great High Priest
to which we have already been introduced (6: 19-20) , namely, the
planting of the anchor of the Christian hope firmly upon the mercy
seat in the eternal sanctuary.

In the course of this argument the author finds it necessary to
establish the fact that the Levitical priesthood has indeed been
set aside through the changing of the Law (vs. 12). This he
proves, first, by reminding his readers of the well-known fact that
Jesus "belonged to another tribe" than Levi, a tribe "from which
no one has ever served at the altar." This tribe was of course that
of Judah (vss. 13-14). Second, he sets beside this historical fact
the words of Psalm 110:4, in which the reigning messianic king
is addressed as "priest for ever, after the order of Melchizedek"
(vss. 15-17). The argument here is based upon the natural ob-
servation that the creation of a messiah-high priest after the order
of Melchizedek which the Psalm avers, does not proceed upon the
basis of law but rather contravenes the explicit commandment in
the Law (vs. 18). It also assumes that there is in the Psalm an
overtone reaching beyond the immediate messianic king and at-
taching itself to Jesus Christ, the eternal Son of God. The justi-
fication for this assumption on the author's part lies in his belief
that Jesus had heard his Father speaking to him in these terms
(see 5:6 and Mark 12:36). That Jesus Christ is such a High
Priest justifies the setting aside of the Law regarding priests, a fact
that rests upon "the power of an indestructible life" (vs. 16)
which, as we have already seen, was his (vss. 3 and 8).

Finally, the author, as though to clinch his entire argument for
the greater worth and validity of the Melchizedekian priesthood
represented by Jesus, calls attention to the fact that in the Psalm
the appointment of the messiah-high priest is made by God, under
oath (vss. 20-22) . This, as he rightly remarks, caimot be said of
the Levitical priesthood. The very solemnity therefore by which
the Melchizedekian priest is appointed is itself proof of his greater
worth in the sight of God. Once again applying the words of the
Psalm to Jesus Christ, he remarks, "This makes Jesus the surety
of a better covenant" (vs. 22), thereby introducing a new element,
that of the New Covenant. As we have already seen, it is this au-
thor's custom to introduce a new subject upon which he will ex-
pound at length later in the book. The theme wiU be developed
particularly in chapters 8 and 9.

50 HEBREWS 7:23-28

Characteristics of the Son as Melchizedekian High Priest (7:23-28)

In the closing verses of the seventh chapter the author takes
the phrase "for ever" ("permanently" in vs. 24) from Psalm
110:4 and develops its meaning and application in the light of the
eternal nature of the Son of God. His intention is to give assur-
ance to the readers that their High Priest is able really "to save
those who draw near to God through him" (vs. 25). This assur-
ance is based upon the fact that Jesus Christ is an eternal figure
who lives forever "to make intercession" for his people. By con-
trast the Levitical priests were many in number because death
intervened to disrupt their priesthood; thus no assurance could be
given that they would see matters through to a definitive end.

No doubt we should see a contrast between the phrases "for
ever" (vs. 24, hterally, "into eternity") and "for all tune" (vs.
25), the one phrase referring to the eternal nature of the High
Priest, Jesus Christ, and the other to the effectiveness of his work
within time. His high priesthood is carried on in eternity, as we
shall see carefuUy elaborated in the next chapter (8:1,4), but its
effectiveness is experienced also by the people whom he serves on
the temporal plane. On that temporal plane and within history this
High Priest had once offered himself on the cross (9:12; 10:1 0).
But that one high-priestly act having been performed on the plane
of history, the High Priest's further activity in the eternal order
consists in "intercession" for his people (vs. 25).

And now we arrive at the pinnacle of Hebrews' characteriza-
tion of this eternal High Priest, Jesus Christ. In verses 26-28 he is
described in terms intended to set him apart from "those high
priests" who officiate under the Levitical system. The author has
aheady called attention to the fact that in his humanity the Leviti-
cal high priest was one with his people, inasmuch as he was
"bound to offer sacrifice for his own sins as well as for those of
the people" (5:3). This weakness of the IvCvitical high priest is
here repeated (7:27). The suggestion that those high priests had
to "offer sacrifices daily" is a pardonable use of hyperbole; the
high priest was obliged to officiate only on one day of the Jew-
ish calendar — the Day of Atonement. Nonetheless, his services on
the Day of Atonement were intended to sum up all the sacrifices
offered throughout the year previous, in order that, so to speak,
the cultic worship might have its slate wiped clean and be enabled
to start anew.

HEBREWS 7:23-28 51

As the author indicates, however, Jesus as High Priest "did this
once for all when he offered up himself," that is, upon the cross
(vs. 27) . For the Christian faith, then, the work of its High Priest,
Jesus Christ, is as final as the Jewish Day of Atonement was con-
ceived to be under the older faith. Only in this case no repetition
of the high-priestly act is required year by year, and this essentially
because of Jesus' eternal character as "a Son." This Son, it is true,
had to be "made perfect for ever" (vs. 28), and this he became,
as already noted, when "he learned obedience through what he
suffered" (5:8); for, being thus "made perfect he became the
source of eternal salvation to all who obey him" (5:9).

As previously remarked, in Hebrews the Christian life is con-
sidered as an ellipse with its two foci of Christ's death on the cross
and his final coming. Each of these foci has one temporal event
in view, and between them lies the activity of this eternal High
Priest in the heavenly tabernacle (see chs. 8-10). This means, in
effect, that the Atonement on the cross within history is an act of
the eternal High Priest accomplished in the outer priestly court
of the eternal tabernacle. This tabernacle has, so to speak, an
outer court which crosses the line dividing history from eternity,
and it is in this outer court in history that the Cross, or altar of
Christian sacrifice, stands. Once the eternal High Priest, the Son
of God, performs his sacrifice at that outer altar he immediately
passes into the eternal tabernacle, never again being required to
offer sacrifice for the sins of his people.

It would be a mistake to understand from verse 27 that the
author thinks of Jesus as offering sacrifice even once "for his
own sins." This might be inferred from the fact that he goes on to
say that "he did this once for all when he offered up himself." But
the high terms which he uses to describe the character of Jesus
Christ as the eternal Son and the eternal High Priest preclude any
such conclusion. In the present context he speaks of him rather
as "holy, blameless, unstained, separated from sinners, exalted
above the heavens" (vs. 26). And elsewhere in the letter he wiU
allow no more than that Jesus himself "has suffered and been
tempted" (2:18), that "he learned obedience through what he suf-
fered" (5:8), and that he was "one who in every respect has been
tempted as we are, yet without sinning" (4:15). This is also the
unanimous testimony of the New Testament Scriptures regarding
the Church's belief in the sinless character of its Lord (Matt
4:1-11; John 8:46; H Cor. 5:21).

52 HEBREWS 8:1-6

THE EFFICACY OF THE SON'S HIGH-PRIESTLY

WORK

Hebrews 8:i — io:i8

Summary Statement (8:i-6)

The Greek word translated "the point" may mean either "prin-
cipal point," "summary," or even "crown"; and similarly the
phrase translated "in what we are saying" may be taken to mean
generally the argument of the letter as a whole, or rather to refer
to what has previously been said, or even to what is about to be
said. Inasmuch as in these six verses the author introduces a refer-
ence successively to the sacrifice, tabernacle, and covenant as they
relate to the high-priestly work of the Son of God — ^matters not
previously mentioned at all, or if so only in casual fashion, and
about to be developed in the next two and a half chapters — ^we
shall assume that the intention here is to give a summary state-
ment of the argument about to be presented.

In general the teaching of the passage is clear enough. Return-
ing to Psalm 110:1 (see 1:13), the author begins with an inclusive
statement intended to define the twofold function of the Son of
God as High Priest and Messianic King "seated at the right hand
of the throne of the Majesty in heaven" (vs. 1). It is not without
significance that, whereas the theme of our Lord's high priesthood
is never lost sight of in chapters 5 through 11, his Messianic of-
fice is referred to only at the beginning of the argument (1:3, 13),
at the beginning and end of the discussion regarding his high-
priestly work (8:1; 10:12-13), and at 12:2, where the purpose is
to exhort the readers to endurance or steadfastness. Jesus Christ is
able to call into action the whole divine power to save. For this is
what it means to be "seated at the right hand of the throne of the
Majesty in heaven."

The summary statement involves a triple contrast between (1)
the "true tent" or tabernacle (vs. 2) which this High Priest serves,
as over against the "copy and shadow of the heavenly sanctuary"
served by the Levitical high priesthood (vs. 5); (2) the "gifts and
sacrifices" offered under the two orders (vs. 3); and (3) the "cove-
nant" which is declared to be better than the first covenant of
the Old Testament period (vs. 6).

HEBREWS 8:1-6 53

The first of these three contrasts concerns the nature of the
tabernacle employed in the worship of the old and new faiths.
Quoting from the Greek translation of Exodus 25:40, the author
points out that the original tabernacle employed by Moses in the
wilderness had been made "according to the pattern which was
shown . . . [him] on the mountain" (vs. 5) , and that in consequence
it was merely "a copy and shadow of the heavenly sanctuary." By
contrast, therefore, our author sees the heavenly tabernacle served
by our Lord as the "true" one, or, in other words, the original or
"pattern" of that served by Moses.

The second contrast which Hebrews makes between the old and
the new systems of worship concerns the matter of "gifts and
sacrifices" (vs. 3 ) . This theme the author will develop at length
in chapter 9. For the moment he abandons it with the mere sug-
gestion that "it is necessary" that Jesus Christ as High Priest also
"have something to offer." And then he curiously inserts at this
point (vs. 4) a statement which appears to be out of place insofar
as his immediate argument is concerned. Perhaps we should see
here a statement intentionally directed against the teaching of the
Qumran sect. For so far as our evidence goes, they alone among
contemporary Jews believed in a messiah-high priest, or a messiah
proceeding from among the sons of Aaron (see Introduction). In
Hebrews the High Priest is also Messiah (that is, "one who is
seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven"
vs. 1), but with the differences that he is not a descendant of Aaron
and is Son of God.

The third contrast between the old and new ministries is that
pertaining to the nature of the two Covenants involved (vs. 6).
And for the moment our author contents himself with the statement
that the New Covenant "is enacted on better promises" than the
Old. In passing, it should be observed that reference is made here
to only one "old" Covenant. This is in accord with the Jewish
point of view and that of the Hebrew prophets. For according to
that old Hebrew- Jewish view there was but one Covenant which
God made with his people, beginning with Abraham. The one
Covenant was repeated many times — ^to Isaac, to Jacob, to Israel
at the Exodus, and on numerous other occasions. But the Cove-
nant was one, whatever the immediate promises involved might be.

What the "better promises" are which attach to the New Cove-
nant are not here specified. And in fact this theme is nowhere
fully developed in the letter. We are left merely with such a pas-

54 HEBREWS 8:7-13

sage as 10:23 and the preceding verses 19-22 from which to in-
fer that the promises intended have reference to our confident en-
tering of "the sanctuary by the blood of Jesus." Indeed, in the
final analysis there is no difference between the promises attach-
ing to Old and New Covenants. This the author himself makes clear
at 11:39-40. The promises attaching to the New Covenant can
only be better, therefore, in the sense that Jesus Christ as High
Priest actually fulfills in his person and work all the promises
which God ever gives to his people throughout history.

Ineffectiveness of the Old Covenant (8:7—9:10)
The Old Covenant (8:7-13)

The author's thesis at this point is clearly expressed in verses 7
and 1 3 — the "first covenant" was not "faultless" and therefore be-
came "obsolete." Being essentially inferior and outworn, the
time had come for the Old Covenant to "vanish away." This, of
course, gave room for the coming of "a new covenant," the one
under which the great High Priest Jesus Christ functions.

In proof of the inferior and "obsolete" nature of the first
Covenant the author turns to the prophetic Scriptures. Jeremiah
(31:31-34) had foreseen the day when the Lord who had made
a first Covenant with Israel would make another of quite different
nature (see also Ezek. 36:24-32). The passage from Jeremiah
adequately meets the needs of our author, inasmuch as the New
Covenant which it prophesies is to be "not like the covenant that I
made with their fathers" (vs. 9). That one had been given to the
people as a whole and was written upon tables of stone. This one
by contrast was to be characterized by laws written upon the
"minds" and "hearts" of men (vs. 10). Nor was the Covenant
made with the people as an undivided unit; rather, it was made in
a manner to take account of individual needs and requirements,
so that it should not be necessary for one to teach another the
knowledge of the Lord, "for all shall know me, from the least of
them to the greatest" (vs. 11).

Though the teaching of the passage is clear, several points may
advisedly find comment. First, the nature of a "covenant" in the
biblical sense should be noted. The very words employed in the
scriptural languages denote something quite different from the
Latin, from which our English word is derived. In Latin and Eng-
lish the word "covenant" means a mutual agreement made by two

i

HEBREWS 9:1-5 55

equal parties who meet together to settle a dispute between them.
The Hebrew and Greek words, on the contrary, might better be
translated "a divine disposal" or "a sovereign proposal." In
Scripture a covenant in which God and man are concerned refers
to a plan which God has conceived and by which man is required
to Hve his hfe. Man is free merely to accept or reject God's Cove-
nant; he cannot in any particular alter it or state conditions for
its functioning. Second, it is clear to both Jeremiah and the au-
thor of Hebrews that only two Covenants are to be recognized in
Scripture, both made by God with the people of his choice. If the
Old Covenant is worthless and "obsolete," it is God who recog-
nizes that this is the case and who makes his plans for the estab-
lishment of a New Covenant. Third, it is not a matter of concern
to the author of Hebrews that the passage from Jeremiah states
that the "new covenant" is to be made "with the house of Israel
and with the house of Judah" (vs. 8). For the author, as for the
Early Church generally (see Rom. 9:6; Gal. 6:16; I Peter 1:1-2;
Rev. 7:4), the Christian community itself is that "Israel" (or
"Judah") to which the prophet refers. In this respect as in others,
we see that there is similarity and yet dissimilarity between the
teaching of Hebrews and that of the Qumran sect. For that sect
also held that it was the people of the "new covenant." It is as
though the author of Hebrews were declaring that the Christian
Church and not the Qumran ccmimunity constitutes the true peo-
ple of God with whom God has made a New Covenant through
Jesus Christ. Finally, it is declared that, with this New Covenant,
God will be "merciful toward their iniquities" and he "will remem-
ber their sins no more" (vs. 12). In other words, the aim of true
reUgion wUl now be accompUshed — the achievement of real fel-
lowship between God and man, fellowship no longer disrupted
by the remembrance of sin, that stumbUng block which in the be-
ginning disrupted the fellowship (Gen. 3:22-24; Heb. 3:16-19).

The Old Tabernacle (9:1-5)

The author, by implication, has already dealt a telling blow to
the effectiveness of the old Tabernacle by speaking of it as merely
"a copy and shadow of the heavenly sanctuary" (8:5). He now
describes this Tabernacle with a view to pointing out certain fea-
tures which suggest its "obsolete" nature.

With some detail he describes, and quite accurately indeed, the
construction and furniture of the "earthly sanctuary" which tradi-

56 HEBREWS 9:1-5

tionally had been set up by Moses in the wilderness and which is
generally called the "tabernacle" (vs. 2, see margin) to distin-
guish it from the Temple (Solomon's, Zerubbabel's, and Herod's).
For its description of the sanctuary Hebrews depends upon Exo-
dus 25 and 26, according to which it was divided into two taber-
nacles or tents, in the first ("outer one") of which were to be
found "the lampstand and the table and the bread of the Presence."
This tent (called "the Holy Place") also contained the golden
altar of incense, although as the author suggests, this golden altar
actually pertained to "the Holy of Holies" or inner tent (vss. 3-5) .
The purpose of the golden altar was for burning the incense which
arose like a sweet savor and passed over the "second curtain"
and so into the Holy of Holies and before the "mercy seat" (see
Exod. 30: 1-10). In the Holy of Holies was "the ark of the cove-
nant," which, according to one tradition at least, contained the
historic items listed in verse 4. We should probably understand
that the "cherubim of glory" stood on either side of the Ark and
spread their wings over the "mercy seat" or representation of
God's throne which formed the cover of the Ark (see Exod.
25:10-22).

"Of these things," the author remarks, "we cannot now speak in
detail" (vs. 5). Such details as he mentions are merely to show
that "the first covenant had regulations for worship" which were
adapted to its function (vs. 1 ) . It is only as we pass on into the
next section (vss. 6-10) that we discover the author's motive in
representing the details of the sanctuary as he has done. His argu-
ment has reference to the presence of "the second curtain" (vs. 3)
hung between the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies. And his
point is that as long as this division existed between the two tents
or tabernacles, there could be no real fellowship between God and
man.

The question has long been debated as to why Hebrews nowhere
mentions Herod's Temple as standing on Mount Zion in Jeru-
salem but rather chooses, for purpose of comparison between the
Old Covenant and the New, to speak of the Tabernacle set up in
the wilderness. It has been argued that this is evidence of the late
date of the letter, which on this assumption was not written until
well after the destruction of Jerusalem with its Temple in a.d. 70.
This argument, however, is no longer valid; Judaism had already,
before the First Jewish War (a.d. 66-70), begun to break away
from the Temple worship in Jerusalem. Sometime after the Exile,

HEBREWS 9:6-10 57

the synagogue had sprung up, particularly under the influence of
the Pharisees and their rabbis, and had become the real center of
worship for the average Jew. Also, the Qumran sect, whether at
its central monastery at Khirbet Qumran or in its numerous scat-
tered communities or "encampments," refused to support the wor-
ship of the Temple, at least to the extent of offering sacrifices
there. But this animus toward the Temple and its sacrifices did
not carry over to the Tabernacle, which, unlike the Temple, had
the prestige of the Mosaic Law behind it (Exod. chs. 25-40) . In
view of these facts it is not surprising that the Letter to the He-
brews should center its thought upon the Tabernacle in the wil-
derness. No Jew of the day could fail to acknowledge its legitimacy,
and in holding it up for criticism the author therefore was striking
at the very heart of worship under the Old Covenant.

The Old Sacrifices (9:6-10)

Hebrews now proceeds to show the inadequacy of the sacrifices
offered in the Tabernacle according to the terms of the Old Cove-
nant. It is true, the author says, that the Levitical "priests go con-
tinually into the outer tent, performing their ritual duties" (vs.
6). But he sees the utmost significance attaching to the fact that
these priests in their daily rounds are not permitted to enter into
the Holy of Holies. Only the high priest is allowed to enter there
"and he but once a year" (vs. 7; see Lev. 16:2, 14, 29-34).

The "ritual duties" (vs. 6) which the common priests were al-
lowed to perform in the Holy Place included the burning of in-
cense on the golden altar, the placing of shewbread, and the
lighting of the seven lights of the "lampstand." But the "second"
curtain dividing the Holy Place from the Holy of Holies debarred
them from entrance to the very presence of God as signified by
the mercy seat on the Ark of the Covenant. The author sees in
the existence of this curtain an indication by the "Holy Spirit"
that "the way into the sanctuary is not yet opened as long as the
outer tent is still standing" (vs. 8). That is, there can be no con-
tinual fellowship between God and his people as long as this cur-
tain exists. It is true, as we have already seen (5:3; 7:27), that the
high priest once a year is allowed to enter the Holy of Holies with
a view to sprinkling the "blood" in that tent and even upon the
Ark of the Covenant itself, blood "which he offers for himself
and for the errors of the people" (vs. 7; Lev. 16:11-19). But even
if this sprinkling of blood were conceded to have accomplished

58 HEBREWS 9:11-14

the end in view, yet it is obvious that such single contact would
have done little for the cause of true religion. It is with this little,
however, that the author is vitally concerned, for it is the product
of the high priest's work on the Day of Atonement. And it is the
work of the high priests under the two Covenants which, by and
large, he wishes to compare (vss. 11-14). It is to be remembered,
however, that in theory all the sacrifices of the Jewish year
reached their climax and were subsumed in those offered by the
high priest on the Day of Atonement. The author considers the
existence of the "second curtain" as "symbolic for the present
age" (vs. 9). Putting together all the sacrifices and offerings under
the Old Covenant, he holds that neither singly nor collectively do
they accomplish the end in view. That is, they "cannot perfect
the conscience of the worshiper." They do not bring to maturity
man's awareness of fellowship with God, nor can they prepare
his spirit to be worthy of such fellowship. Rather, Hebrews sees
them as merely "ritual duties" (vs. 6), that is, as ceremonials
whose function is to keep alive the cult and to carry on its ritual
from year to year. They "deal only with food and drink and vari-
ous ablutions, regulations for the body" (vs. 10). They serve to
cleanse the worshiper and the instruments and furniture of wor-
ship and are performed in accordance with the various taboos of
a cult religion. Looked at from this point of view, even the work
of the high priest on the Day of Atonement is nothing more than
a cultic act or series of acts whose sole purpose is to sum up the
necessary cultic acts prescribed for a given year, with a view to
starting a new religious year afresh. And indeed it may be said
that the ritual enjoined in Leviticus 16, in which the high priest
sprinkles the blood of the appointed sacrifices upon all the furni-
ture of worship, the Tabernacle itself in its various parts, and even
the worshiping congregation, appears to justify the conclusion
of the author. Such cultic acts are "imposed until the time of ref-
ormation" (vs. 10) or of transformation, which, of course, He-
brews equates with the Christian era.

Effectiveness of the New Covenant (9:11-28)

The New Sacrifice (9:11-14)

The few verses of the present section represent the heart of the
message of Hebrews. Sacrifice with a view to the assurance of the
worshiper's acceptance into fellowship with God is, on different

i

HEBREWS 9:11-14 59

levek, the high point of religion in both the Old and New Scrip-
tures. As we have just seen, this high point was supposed to have
been reached once a year on the Day of Atonement with the en-
trance of the high priest into the Holy of Holies. The concern of
the present section, therefore, is to show that, whereas the sacri-
fices which the Jewish high priest presented on that occasion were
inadequate to serve spiritual ends, by contrast the sacrifice of
Jesus Christ as eternal High Priest did accomphsh these very ends.
The author summarizes in these few verses much that he has al-
ready said. Indeed, almost every word of the passage is full of
meaning — meaning either previously pointed out or now for the
first time disclosed. This may be briefly summarized as follows:

First, the stress falls on the high priesthood of Jesus Christ, a
conception which has been a major point of the letter from 2: 17
forward. Here the high priesthood is defined as relating to "the
good things that have come" (vs. 1 1 ) , or that have happened.

Second, Christ's high-priestly work includes his traversing "the
greater and more perfect tent (not made with hands, that is, not
of this creation)." This is in contrast to the functioning of both
high priest and lesser priests of the Jewish cult to which reference
was made in verses 6-10. The point had already been made at
4:14 that "we have a great high priest who has passed through
the heavens, Jesus, the Son of God." That is to say, our Lord has
high-priestly functions in the eternal and genuine tabernacle, a
fact to which further reference will be made in verses 24-28.

Third, the offering which he has to make is "not the blood of
goats and calves but his own blood" (vs. 12), and therefore it is
an offering worthy of "securing an eternal redemption" for the
j>eople of God. The offering of blood on the part of Christ is to
be understood in the light of: ( 1 ) the act of the Jewish high priest
on the Day of Atonement, who sprinkled the blood of a bull (Lev.
16:14) and of a goat (Lev. 16:15-19) on the mercy seat in the
Holy of Holies to make atonement for the sins of all the people;
(2) the next passage (9:15-22), where the blood is explained as
being "the blood of the covenant" (vs. 20); and (3) those pas-
sages in Hebrews in which Christ's offering is said to be that of
"himself (9:14, 25) or his "body" (10:10-12; see 9:28). From
a study of all these passages it becomes clear that "blood," when
shed and presented to God, stands for the dedication of the life,
the giving of all that can be rendered on behalf of man.

Fourth, the author clinches his argument with a reference to

60 HEBREWS 9:15-23

the efficacy of the sacrifices offered on the Day of Atonement by
the Jewish high priest. Far from denying that efficacy, he asserts
it as the basis of his argument for the vaHdity and efficacy of the
sacrifice of Christ. He asserts, however, that the sacrifices of the
Jewish sacrificial system avail only "for the purification of the
flesh" (vs. 13), that is, only for the purposes of the cultic system
of worship, as we have already seen above in verses 9 and 10.
Here he mentions specifically "the blood of goats and bulls" be-
cause it was such blood as this that the high priest offered on the
Day of Atonement (Lev. 16:11-19). As already said above, the
only sacrifices and rituals to which reference is made in Hebrews
are those which concern the activity of the high priest on the Day
of Atonement. This is because the author is concerned to compare
Christ as eternal High Priest with the high priest under the Leviti-
cal system, but also because the sacrifices performed by the high
priest on that day were in a real sense climactic and may be con-
sidered as embracing all others under the Mosaic Law. The only
exception to this statement is perhaps the reference to "the ashes
of a heifer" (vs. 13). These ashes had nothing specifically to do
with the work of the high priest nor with the sacrifices of the Day
of Atonement. They were employed in connection with the puri-
fication of a person who had touched a corpse (Num. 19:9, 17-19).
They do, therefore, have a general reference to the subject in
hand, inasmuch as an unclean person was excluded from the fel-
lowship and particularly from the worship of the people of God.
And the point of this letter is exactly that the work of Christ ac-
complishes aU that is necessary in order to achieve this end.

Finally, "the blood of Christ" stands for his self -offering through
"the eternal Spirit" (vs. 14). That is to say, the guarantor of
Christ's sacrifice is not an ephemeral animal, but rather is the
eternal Spirit of God. Christ's act, therefore, is an act efficacious
in the realm of spirit and should be of service to aU those who
would purify the "conscience from dead works" with a view to
serving the God who is alive (vs. 14; see vs. 9).

The New Covenant (9115-23)

The author now returns to a comparison of the covenants per-
taining to the two rehgions which he is contrasting. His argument
takes the form of a series of tQustrations designed to prove that
no covenant is properly ratffied without the shedding of blood.
The first of these is taken from the custom of drafting a last "will"

HEBREWS 9:15-23 61

and testament (vs. 16). In the Greek the same term is employed
for a "covenant" and for a "will." Playing upon this double usage
of the word in Greek, the author can remark that "the death of
the one who made it [the will] must be established. For a will
takes effect only at death, since it is not in force as long as the one
who made it is alive" (vss. 16-17) . Paul makes a somewhat similar
use of the double connotation of the word in Galatians 3:15
(see margin).

The second illustration, taken from the ratification of the first
Covenant in the time of Moses, is more obviously relevant (vss.
18-21). In his account of the matter the author has curiously
mixed together several passages (Exod. 24:3-8; 12:22; Lev. 8:15,
19; Num. 19:6) which had severally to do with the ratification
of the first Covenant, the celebration of the Passover at the Exo-
dus, and the purification of a leper. Whether this is intentional on
his part or simply a matter of inadvertence, we have no way of
knowing. He also remarks in verse 19 that "the book itself" — ^pre-
sumably the "book of the covenant" (Exod. 24:7) — is sprinkled
with the blood of the Covenant, but of this there is no evidence
in the original account. Further, he says that "the tent and all the
vessels used in worship" were sprinkled with the blood (vs. 21),
although there was no Tabernacle until later.

The third illustration which the author employs is of a more
general character, as he makes the sweeping statement that "imder
the law almost everything is purified with blood" (vs. 22). This
statement is correct, and the various purifications by blood on the
Day of Atonement are the best proof of the same.

The author now concludes that since "the copies" are cleansed
with blood, "the heavenly things themselves" require to be cleansed
with "better sacrifices" (vs. 23). The argument is, of course, an
analogical one and can carry us only so far. It is based, as is the
whole argument of Hebrews with regard to Christ's high priest-
hood, upon a fundamental belief in the continuity of revelation
between the Old and New Covenants. In consequence we must
believe the readers to be Jewish Christians for whom the Old
Testament Scriptures constituted an authoritative document be-
fore they accepted the Christian faith. The author now reverts in
verse 15 to what he has already said with regard to "those who
are called" to "receive the promised eternal inheritance," which
is the theme of the gospel whenever it is uttered. It is obvious, too,
that it is particularly to such Jewish Christians that his statement

62 HEBREWS 9:24-28

would be peculiarly of interest that "a death has occurred which
redeems them from the transgressions under the first covenant"
(vs. 15). "Redemption" literally refers to the manumission of
slaves and in the scriptural context always recalls the redemp-
tion of Israel from the bondage of slavery in Egypt. No Jew-
ish Christian could fail so to understand the reference. However,
in the New Testament Scriptures the word has undergone a dis-
tinct spiritualization and generally refers, as here, to the forgive-
ness of sins (Eph. 1:7; Col. 1:14; see Rom. 3:24-26). Thus it
would be clear, at any rate to those who had the teachings of the
Hebrew prophetic Scriptures in mind and who were acquainted
with the analogies presented by the author, that the second Cove-
nant could accomplish what the first Covenant merely fore-
shadowed; and indeed this accomplishment included forgiveness
of transgressions which the Law under the first Covenant had
multiplied (see Rom. 5:20-21).

The New Tabernacle (9:24-28)

In dividing chapters 8 and 9 into various sections, we must
avoid every tendency to limit the author's discussion in any section
to a particular topic. For in his mind the elements of covenant,
tabernacle, and sacrifices constitute a unity which is self-contained.
Over all the instruments of religion are the Covenants (Old and
New) which God has made with his people through the ages; un-
der these Covenants, the two tabernacles (the earthly and the
heavenly) have been appointed as places for God and man to draw
nigh to each other; and it is in these that the sacrifices (animal and
Christ's) are offered.

In line with this unity, it should be noted that the present section
and the one in verses 11-14 begin in very much the same manner
and furnish us to an extent with a repetition of the same ideas.
There is, however, a new aspect introduced into the argument in
the present section. This concerns the implications for worship
and for man's salvation generally which the existence of the
heavenly sanctuary brings to fight. These may be said to include
the following: First, inasmuch as the true sanctuary is in "heaven
itself (vs. 24), our Lord may be said to have appeared "in the
presence of God" in a way that was denied to even the high priest
as he entered into the inner Holy of Hofies of the earthly Taber-
nacle. This will be seen to have significance for those who follow
Jesus into the sanctuary (10: 19; see by contrast 9:8). Again, our

HEBREWS 10:1-18 63

Lord's entrance as High Priest into the heavenly sanctuary need
not be performed "repeatedly" (vs. 25). Repetitions of this type,
as the author has already indicated, serve to show the nonvalidity
of the sacrifices thus presented (vss. 8-10). This is because such
sacrifices are associated only with the things of "this creation"
(vs. 11) rather than with those of "heaven itself' (vs. 24). And
they have no more final character than any other events attaching
to the earthly plane. In consequence, Christ, had he been an
earthly high priest, "would have had to suffer repeatedly since the
foundation of the worid" (vs. 26). His sacrifice, it is true, was of-
fered on the earthly plane and "at the end of the age," but it had
heavenly associations which were denied to the sacrifices of the
Levitical priests; it was "the sacrifice of himself," that is, of the
eternal Son and "through the eternal Spirit" (vs. 14). This per-
sonal, heavenly character of our Lord's sacrifice set it apart from
all others which preceded it. The "now" in verse 24 is intended to
make clear this subtle relation between the historical and the
eternal nature of Christ's sacrifice, a relation which is wholly
unique. The earthly and the heavenly are "once for all" united in
the "now" of Jesus Christ's sacrifice.

Finally, this "once for all" aspect of the work of Christ is as-
serted in the form of an analogy drawn from common experience.
It is a well-known fact that in the natural order there is a finality
attaching to death. Man, then, can look forward to nothing inter-
vening before the coming of the "judgment" of God (vs. 27). Our
author now sees a similar finality about the work of Christ. His
offering "to bear the sins of many" is just as final as the death of
men on the plane of human affairs. Nor will anything intervene
between that death and his coming "a second time" for the salva-
tion of his people (vs. 28). And here our author expresses his
thought with a quotation ("to bear the sins of many") taken from
Isaiah 53:12 and the description of the work of the Suffering
Servant of the Lord. Although the author employs throughout the
imagery of the high pri^thood of Melchizedek, he shares the
common conviction of the Early Church that our Lord in his
work and ministry fulfilled the concept of the Suffering Servant

The Once-for-All Aspect of the Son's High-Priestly Work

(io:i-i8)

The author now sets out to justify what he terms the "once for

64 HEBREWS 10:1-18

all" nature of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ (vs. 10; see 9:26). He
does this first by pointing out that "the law," Hke the former
Tabernacle, has merely "a shadow of the good things to come,"
that is, the reahties to which it points forward (vs. 1; see 8:5).
When he speaks of "the law" he undoubtedly has in mind the Mo-
saic ceremonial legislation with regard to sacrifice, as the entire ar-
gument clearly indicates. The words which he uses ("shadow" for
the legal regulations and "true form" for the sacrifice of Christ)
correspond to the fact that he has called the former Tabernacle
merely "a copy and shadow" (8:5), whereas the heavenly sanc-
tuary into which Christ as High Priest enters is the original "pat-
tern" shown to Moses in the Mount. And he makes the point — only
hinted at previously (9:25-26) — ^that the yearly sacrifices on the
Day of Atonement offered by the Jewish high priest served as "a
reminder of sin" (vs. 3), creating in the worshiper a "conscious-
ness of sin" (vs. 2), and therefore a conviction that he had not
been cleansed or saved by such legal sacrifices. He concludes this
part of his discussion with the statement of his conviction that "it
is impossible that the blood of bulls and goats should take away
sins" (vs. 4). Essentially this argument amounts to what he has
already said at 9:9-10 and 13 — that the animal sacrifices under
the Law only served to maintain the ritual worship in functioning
order.

It is clear from the statement of his case that the author's
major interest in this letter, as we have already had reason to
note (2:11; 9:14), relates to the sanctification or inner cleansing
of the worshiper from a "consciousness of sin" (vs. 2). It is such
inner cleansing that he equates with making perfect (vss. 1 and
14) . This is not to say that the writer is not aware of the more ob-
jective side of salvation; indeed, he comes close to the Pauline
teaching with regard to justification in several passages (10:38;
11:4,7).

The author now indicates the "once for all" adequacy of Jesus
Christ's sacrifice, using as a new approach a quotation from
Psalm 40:6-8. This is admittedly neither a "royal" nor "suffering
servant" Psalm. The quotation, however, is relevant to the needs
of the writer at the moment, inasmuch as it affirms the valueless-
ness of the sacrifices prescribed under the Law. In the Hebrew
original the psalmist contrasts such sacrificial offerings with the
fact that, as he says of the Lord, "thou hast given me an open
ear." The Greek translation of this last clause is rendered "a

HEBREWS 10:1-18 65

body hast thou prepared for me." The meaning is doubtless the
same, and both Hebrew and Greek have the worshiper declare,
"Lo, I have come to do thy will, O God." It is this doing of the
divine wiU upon which Hebrews lays stress (vs. 9).

The author's application of these verses to the Incarnation
("when Christ came into the world," vs. 5) has the general justi-
fication which attaches to the employment of another's language
to articulate one's own thought. It is to be noted that the New
Testament nowhere makes further use of this quotation from the
Psalm. It is instructive to note, however, that verse 9 of the Psalm,
which our author does not quote, contains the phrase "the glad
news of deliverance," which the psalmist says he has announced
"in the great congregation." It may be argued that the "glad
news" referred to here is the gospel in embryo. In any case, the
author of Hebrews fastened on the passage as one qualified to
articulate his own thought that over against the many sacrifices
of Judaism, which serve only as reminders of their inadequacy to
cleanse man's conscience, Jesus Christ's self-offering ("a body
hast thou prepared for me" and "I have come to do thy will, O
God") is something new in the realm of sacrificial worship. Here
is the self -giving of a Person on behalf of persons. It is a giving
which functions in the realm of spirit, and accordingly the deduc-
tion may be drawn that "we have been sanctified through the of-
fering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all" (vs. 10).

It should be noted that in both the Hebrew and the Greek
(whose thought-frames in the New Testament spring from the
Hebrew), "body" stands for the entire active person. In conse-
quence, to give one's body is the same as to give one's self, as is
intended in the saying at verse 7 — "Lo, I have come to do thy
will, O God." The teaching of the passage is generally in accord
with that of 2:10-18. As there, so here, the identification with
mankind on Jesus' part which was accomplished at the Incarna-
tion had in view the final Atonement and the surrender of his
body wholly to do the will of God. And once more, as at 9: 1 1-14,
the cogency of his argument resides in the spiritual difference ob-
servable between the offering of "the blood of buUs and goats"
( 10:4) and the offering of "the body of Jesus Christ" ( 10: 10) .

The third argument which our author at this point presents in
favor of the once-for-allness of Christ's sacrifice is found in the
different postures of the priests under the two Covenants. The
Levitical priests are compelled to stand daily in their service of

66 HEBREWS 10:19-31

sacrifice (vs. 11); but, as shown in the quotation from Psalm
110:1 (already employed in several contexts, see 1:3, 13; 8:1),
Jesus Christ after making his "single sacrifice for sins" is able to
sit down at the right hand of God (vs. 12). This is the act of one
who knows that he has accomplished the task he was given to do
and that God has accepted his work as final. Scripture, therefore,
is justification for the conclusion that "by a single offering he has
perfected for all time those who are sanctified" (vs. 14).

Finally, the author again draws upon the passage from Jere-
miah 31 :33-34 relative to the New Covenant — a Covenant which
he assumes his readers will now agree to be the one under which
our Lord's high priesthood may be said to function — as proof that
in the work of Christ there is no longer a remembrance of sins,
and that in consequence these have received forgiveness (vss.
17-18). There is, therefore, as he remarks, "no longer any offer-
ing for sin" required.

The argument of this passage once again suggests the possibility
that Hebrews has in mind the teachings of the Qumran sect. This
group had rejected the sacrifices of the Temple and held that "the
offering of the lips" — ^presumably of prayer and praise — ^was
more acceptable in the sight of God than all offerings and sacri-
fices. Hebrews also knows of the sacrifice which prayer entails,
and it teaches a doctrine of a High Priest who "always lives to
make intercession" for his people (7:25). But in the present pas-
sage the concern is to point out that intercession is an inadequate
substitute for sacrifice, if man's sins are to be forgiven. Forgive-
ness and purification require rather the substitution of human
sacrifice for animal sacrifice, of a High Priest who offers himself
for man's sin in place of priests appointed to make offerings which
do not intimately touch the human spirit.

THE RESPONSE REQUIRED OF SONS TO THE
HIGH-PRIESTLY WORK OF THE SON

Hebrews 10:19 — 13:17

Summary Statement (10:19-31)

We come now to the last major section of the letter. There is a
certain co-ordination between this section and the second major

HEBREWS 10:19-31 67

division beginning at 3:1 and running through 4:16. There the
author was dealing with the gospel call to the sons to become
"God's house." That call was issued in view of the general testi-
mony which had been given to the redemptive power and lord-
ship of God's Son. In the meantime the author has sketched out
the nature of the Son's high priesthood and the efficacy of his
high-priestly work. Appropriately, therefore, he issues the gospel
call again and this time on the foundation laid in the intervening
sections from 5:1 — 10:18.

It is not surprising, then, to notice that the call is issued in al-
most identical language with that at 4:14-16. The approximation
of the language is far closer in the Greek than in the English
translation. Note the similarities between 4:14 and 10:19-21 and
between 4:16 and 10:22. Other similarities in thought if not in
word are found in the two passages; for example, at 4:15 the
author stresses Jesus' ability to sympathize with our weaknesses
in view of his own temptations, while at 10:20 reference is made
to the "way . . . through his flesh," that is, to the Incarnation as
the method adopted to prepare man's approach to God.

It is clear that the author's argument relative to the Son's high-
priestly work in the fourth major section of the letter (8:1 —
10:18) has carried him far beyond the analogy previously drawn
between Christ as High Priest and Melchizedek (5:1 — 7:28).
Though in their eternal character a real similarity is seen between
the two priesthoods, Melchizedek never went so far as to offer
himself as a living sacrifice to God on behalf of man. It is only
"by the blood of Jesus" (vs. 19) that we may have "confidence to
enter the sanctuary" and so enjoy eternal fellowship with God.
Jesus' "blood" is specified as the means of access to God, as has
already been done at 9:12 and 14. But, as we have already seen,
such mention is made there in deference to the comparison to the
blood of "goats and calves" offered by the high priest on the Day
of Atonement, and essentially the reference is to Christ's offer-
ing of "himself" (9:14) or of his "body" (10:5-10).

The method of salvation is now described as "the new and liv-
ing way which he opened for us through the curtain, that is,
through his flesh" (vs. 20) . The reference is undoubtedly to the
method chosen by our Lord to redeem man, which was one of in-
carnation followed by atonement and resurrection. The adjective
"new" applied to this way actually means "fresh" as opposed to
decomposed and may be taken as tJhe equivalent of "living." Prob-

68 HEBREWS 10:19-31

ably verse 20 should read: "By the new and living way of his flesh
which he opened for us through the curtain," rather than as in the
Revised Standard Version. Interpreters differ on whether "flesh"
here is to be taken with "way" or with "curtain." But the "cur-
tain" which our author has in mind is that separating the Holy
Place from the Holy of Holies and designed to indicate that
"the way into the sanctuary is not yet opened as long as the outer
tent is still standing" (9:8). It is impossible that, in the mind of
any Christian writer of the first century, Jesus' flesh should typify
that curtain or vice versa. There is no evidence in the New Testa-
ment that Jesus' flesh was thought of as an obscuring medium or
one intended to hide his divinity. On the contrary, the only pas-
sage which makes reference to a veil or curtain obscuring God's
glory from man is II Corinthians 3:7-18. And there it is quite
clear that the veil is man's blindness which makes it impossible
for him to behold God's truth and that "only through Christ is it
taken away" (II Cor. 3:14). Indeed, in the present verse the
preposition "through" before the words "his flesh" is not found
in the Greek, and if the author's intention had been that we should
read "through the curtain of his flesh," obviously the phrase "that
is" would not have been required. It is through "the living way of
his flesh" — ^that is, through the Incarnation and the resulting
Atonement and Resurrection — that Jesus leads onward "through
the curtain" which separates man from God.

There is a striking similarity between our author's argument at
this point and that of Paul in I Corinthians 5:7-8 relative to the
nature of the Christian Ufe. Paul there compares the Christian
life to a continuous Passover festival from which "the leaven of
malice and evil" has been removed so that Christians may live
their hves upon "the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth."
Similarly, Hebrews conceives of the Christian way of life as a
continuous Day of Atonement.

In the life of service three things particularly are of importance
and should be practiced by every son of God. First, there is the
coming to God "in full assurance of faith" (vs. 22). Such assur-
ance is based upon the cleansing "from an evil conscience" which,
as the author has already indicated, is possible only through the
offering of Christ (9: 14), that is, through the action of one per-
son for another, the personal factor of faith or trust being the
uniting spark between the two. The reference to "our bodies
washed with pure water" is without doubt a reference to baptism.

HEBREWS 10:19-31 69

which the Early Church considered the mark of saving witness
(see Rom. 6:1-8), and to which the author has already referred
(6:2). Second, as before, he suggests that we must "hold fast the
confession of our hope without wavering" (vs. 23; see 3:6, 14;
6:11). This "hope," as we have already seen, is by no means a
weak one. Rather, it is as certain as anything may be in the spir-
itual realm. It is the "sure and steadfast anchor of the soul" which
Jesus has affixed to the mercy seat within the curtain (6:19-20).
Moreover, as our author now adds, the certainty of its fuUBUment
is based upon the promise of God who is above all else "faithful."
Third, we are to "meet together" in corporate endeavor to fulfill
the demands of worship on this continuous Day of Atonement.
And our fellowship is to be one of stimulus "to love and good
works" (vs. 24). Of this more will be said in succeeding sections.

Reference has previously been made to the fact that Christians
are living in the eschatological time, or, as our author says, in
"these last days" (1:2). Such was the common beUef of the early
Christian Church which produced the New Testament Scriptures
(see Mark 1:15; Phil. 4:5; James 5:8-9). The end of this eschato-
logical period would be the Day of Judgment or, to employ Amos'
phrase, "the day of the Lord" (Amos 5:18). There can be no
doubt that it is this great Day which the author has in mind in
verse 25, as the succeeding verses clearly indicate. This is the Day
of Judgment for aU men. Christians and pagans alike, and the
author suggests that the Christian life should be lived in constant
awareness of the demands of him who is the Judge of all men.

Verses 26 to 31 contain the author's reason for suggesting that
the Day of Judgment should stand for us as an incentive to right
Uving. Essentially the argument is based upon his conception of the
once-for-allness involved in every event in the series of righteous
acts which together constitute God's relation to his world and
particularly to men. He has already asserted the once-for-aU char-
acter of the self-sacrifice of Jesus Christ as man's High Priest
(7:27; 9: 12). Moreover, he has declared that this once-for-allness
guarantees that "there is no longer any offering for sin" (vs. 18).
The present passage, therefore, is a reminder that if this one sac-
rifice is spumed, "there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins" (vs.
26). And, indeed, what further consideration may Christians who
have spumed "the truth" expect? For to deny the once-for-allness
of the unique sacrifice of Jesus Christ is essentially to deny the
Christian faith. This is the final apostasy.

70 HEBREWS 10:32-39

Such persons have nothing save "a fearful prospect of judg-
ment" to which they may look forward (vs. 27). Those who deny
the validity of Christ's sacrifice and so of the Christian faith have
placed themselves alongside pagans, of whom our author has al-
ready written, "it is appointed for men to die once, and after that
comes judgment" (9:27). And as in other places our author has
adopted the argument from the less to the greater (see 9: 13-14),
in comparing the older revelation with the new, so here he argues
for a "much worse punishment" for Christians who have denied
the light they received in Jesus Christ than for those who have
merely "violated the law of Moses" (vss. 28-29).

Hebrews' analysis of this type of apostasy (vs. 29) includes
three things: (1) spurning the Son of God and his sacrifice for
man; (2) holding that "the blood of the covenant" is a common
thing incapable of sanctifying, that is, of rendering the worshiper
fit to approach God in fellowship; and (3) arrogantly spurning
the offices of the gracious Spirit who has been present in the com-
munity (2:4; 6:4; 9:8) and in the work of Jesus Christ himself
(9: 14). The author assures his readers that the promises of judg-
ment proclaimed by the Lord to his people are as certain as the
promises of grace (compare 4:1-10 and Deut. 32:35-36; Ps. 135:
14). His argument here is the same as that running through the
prophetic writings of the Old Testament and Jesus' teachings (see,
for example, Amos 3:2). Jesus summarizes this point of view in
his words, "Every one to whom much is given, of him will much
be required; and of him to whom men commit much they will de-
mand the more" (Luke 12:48b). The argument then comes neces-
sarily to the conclusion that God is as surely "the living God" to
punish as "the living God" to bless and to save (vs. 31; see 3:12;
9:14).

Examples of Faith (Hope) (10:32 — 11:40)

The Readers (10:32-39)

Following the above section in which response to the gospel
call is briefly developed along the lines of faith, hope, and love
(the trilogy made famous by Paul in I Corinthians 13), stress is
now laid upon "faith" as the expression of the sons' response re-
quired in the present condition of the readers. Three things stand
out in this passage as peculiarly noteworthy: first, the psychologi-
cal value attaching to commendation of previous worthy action on

HEBREWS 10:32-39 71

the part of people with whom one is counseling; second, the his-
torical detail involved in the presentation of the example; and
third, the encouragement to be derived from the author's eschato-
logical views.

It is clear from the passage that shortly after the readers had
been baptized ("enlightened," that is, awakened to spiritual appre-
hension by the Holy Spirit; see 6:4; Eph. 1:18), they had been
subjected to persecution involving "hard struggle with sufferings,"
public abuse, the imprisonment of some, the "plundering" of
"property," and the courageous sharing of sufferings generally
among the Christian community (vss. 32-34). There is consider-
able difference of opinion among New Testament interpreters as
to the occasion referred to in this description (see Introduction).
The persecution was apparently not as violent as those under the
Roman emperors, when Christians were persecuted for the sacred
name of Christ and wholesale slaughter was practiced in many
cases. There is here no suggestion that any lost their lives. The
statement at 12:4, "you have not yet resisted to the point of
shedding your blood," probably refers to the entire Christian ex-
perience of the readers. It may be, therefore, that this persecu-
tion is the one experienced by the Hellenistic-Jewish branch of
the Church in the very early days in Jerusalem and the nearby
vicinity (Acts 8: 1-3). In any case, the author appeals to the read-
ers' conviction that they have "a better possession and an abiding
one" (vs. 34). It is this "confidence" to which he had already
referred in 3: 14, a confidence leading to our "share in Christ" or,
as here, "a great reward" (vs. 35). As throughout the letter, the
stress is upon the "need of endurance" that his readers may "in-
herit the promises" (6:12). It is this endurance which lies within
"the will of God" (vs. 36).

With a view to lightening the load to be placed upon his readers,
the author now quotes from Habakkuk 2:3-4 to the effect that the
endurance required is for only "a little while." The promised
coming of Jesus Christ "a second time" (see 9:28) as High Priest
is seen in the perspective of God's eternal purpose to save man-
kind. Though no temporal span of an exact nature may be indi-
cated nor a chronological scheme worked out, nonetheless, for any
generation of Christians, endurance is for but "a little while." In
the meantime, God's righteous people must "live by faith" — not by
sight but by perseverance in the Christian faith. And, as before
at 6:9-12 so now, the readers are assured that they are "not of

72 HEBREWS 11:1-40

those who shrink back and are destroyed, but of those who have
faith and keep their souls" (vs. 39). The psychological value of this
sort of argument is obvious, as well as Christian.

Old Testament Worthies (11:1-40)

The second example of faith as response to the gospel call is
derived from the experience of the Old Testament worthies re-
ferred to by name or inference in the present chapter. Before enu-
merating the examples which he has chosen, the author first calls
the attention of his readers to the remarkable power of faith as
response to God's word and the fact that it wins "divine approval"
(vss. 1-3).

This would seem to be the proper point in the study of this
letter to summarize Hebrews' teaching on the subject of faith.
Examination of the various passages in which the tenn is used
reveals the fact that for the author: (1) faith is the one response
which God expects of those who have heard the gospel call (4:2) ;
(2) fundamentally such faith depends upon God (6:1-3), and
so may be defined as personal attachment or trust; (3) such trust
results primarily in man's receiving "the promises" of God to his
people (6:12; 11:13, 39-40); (4) it stimulates "assurance" of
one's acceptance among God's people at the throne of grace
(10:22) and of being numbered among the saved (10:39); (5)
it is the means whereby man perceives and accepts the divine
philosophy of history (11:3); (6) it has implications for the
Christian life, providing God's people with the courage requisite
to hving victoriously in a sinful world (11:6-7, 33-38); (7) it is
the spiritual bond between Jesus, "the pioneer and perfecter of
our faith," and his people (12:2); (8) and accordingly it makes
its possessor "an heir of the righteousness which comes by faith"
only, which means God's final approval of his people and his ac-
ceptance of them (11:6-7; 13:7).

In the present chapter the author makes it his object to show
that faith exhibits the miraculous power of dissolving the time-
space framework in which men live their lives. This is its primary
function, and it accomplishes this for every man in the context in
which he lives. No matter what his temporal and spatial limitations
be, faith sets him in a large place from which he can see the dis-
tant scene from the perspective of God. The chapter opens with
a description of how faith operates along the fines just suggested
and thereafter follows a series of illustrations of the point.

HEBREWS 11:1-40 73

"Faith," says our author, is related to "things hoped for," that
is, those things which are beyond the boundaries set by the time
dimension of man's life. Similarly, it is related to "things not
seen," that is, things beyond the space boundary set by the human
eye (vs. 1). Two Greek words in the verse indicate what faith is
capable of doing to these temporal and spatial boundaries. The
first word, translated "assurance," relates to the underlying struc-
ture or content of anything which makes it what it is. However, the
term is used eventually in many ways, and its context in this chap-
ter would suggest that our writer may have in mind something
like its use as "a title deed." A title deed is that which is guaran-
teed to give substance to a piece of property which one has pur-
chased. And the context of the present chapter, indeed that of the
entire essay, indicates that for the writer faith is "a title deed"
which gives substance to the things beyond the barrier set by the
time dimension of the framework of our lives. Similarly, the
second term is one used in the common parlance of the day for "a
lawyer's brief" as well as for the "conviction" established by such
a brief in the mind of the judge(s). Faith, then, is the lawyer's
brief which "convicts" us of God's verities which lie beyond the
spatial barrier of our lives. Little wonder that those who employ
such faith receive the "divine approval" (vs. 2), for in doing so
they are adding a divine dimension to their lives; they are set in
a large place from which they may view life and the world ac-
cording to the divine perspective.

Before giving examples from among the Old Testament worthies
who had this faith, the author suggests that it is by "faith" that
men come to understand history. Pagan peoples see no need for
a doctrine which separates the Creator from the created. But the
God of history, of the Hebrew prophets, and of the Christian faith
is a God of every part of history, including its beginning and its
end. He started the series of events which constitute history, he is
the Providence who never deserts it, and he will conclude it in
his own good time. This view of God and the world is one ac-
cepted "by faith." That "the world was created by the word of
God" (vs. 3 ) is the view stressed both in Genesis 1 and in John 1
(see also Rom. 1:20). Already, therefore, our author has in a
quite subtle fashion indicated that his readers have "by faith" been
removed from the time-space framework of their Uves. With its
long arm they have, as it were, reached out to the very beginning
of time and history and brought even the events of the creation

74 HEBREWS 11:1-40

epoch within the sphere of their own interests, discerning their
relevance for themselves.

The three examples of men of faith in the period before Abra-
ham are particularly apt (Abel, Enoch, and Noah). Abel is chosen
because it is recorded of him that he is the first to bring an offering
of sheep (in later years so largely used in the Old Testament sac-
rificial system with which Hebrews has been dealing), and Genesis
4:4 asserts that "the Lord had regard for Abel and his offering."
Though the account of this incident does not say so, it may well
be argued that it is "by faith" (vs. 4) that Abel makes his offering
to God. At any rate, no Jew could deny that Abel's offering was a
more acceptable one than that of Cain, as the later Levitical sacri-
fices appeared to substantiate. The common Semitic practice of
sacrifice and belief in its general acceptance in the eyes of God
formed the background for the argument.

The argument with reference to Hebrews' second example (that
of Enoch) is based on Genesis 5:21-24. Of Enoch it was said that
he "walked with God." This is interpreted in Hebrews to mean
that he "was attested as having pleased God" (vs. 5). From the
Christian standpoint it is evident that "without faith it is impos-
sible to please him" (vs. 6) , from which it may be deduced that
Enoch had faith in God. The argument that those who, like Enoch,
"would draw near to God" should as a minimum "believe that he
exists" (vs. 6) is perhaps not entirely happy in its expression. For
as James remarks, "Even the demons believe" in the oneness of
God (James 2:19). It must be remembered, however, that the au-
thor of Hebrews is consciously dealing with a very rudimentary
type of faith. It is pre-Abrahamic faith, or, if one prefer, the type
of faith shown by a man quite outside the boundaries of the
Chosen People of God. No doubt these early examples are chosen
deliberately to exhibit the breadth of the Christian faith; for its
depth and height, however, we must look elsewhere.

Of the three examples chosen from beyond the pale of the
"people of God" (11:25), the example of Noah is by far the
clearest. Genesis 6: 13-22 and, indeed, the entire account regarding
Noah give evidence of a special call which Noah received and of
special revelation made to him regarding God's will. Accordingly,
in the early Christian Church much was made of the example of
Noah as "a herald of righteousness" in a sinful world (II Peter
2:5). In one account of the eschatological discourse of our Lord,
Noah figures as an example of the man of God who, by reason

HEBREWS 11:1-40 75

of his faith, is ready for "the coming of the Son of man" at the
end of history (Matt. 24:37-39; Luke 17:26-27). In I Peter 3:18-
20, Noah is made to serve as the typical person who through
baptism has come within "the ark" and thus may be said to be
"saved through water." Christian art of the period of the cata-
combs and persecutions makes much of this example of Noah, and
of the ark, in representing the Church itself.

Accordingly, Noah could be held up as an example of one who
by faith had become aware of "events as yet unseen" and who
might be said, therefore, to have burst the temporal and spatial
boundaries and come to view the events of history as God sees
them. In so doing he cleariy "condemned the worid," its small
perspective, its Uttle framework of reference. One might well be
assured, therefore, that Noah had become "an heir of the right-
eousness which comes by faith" (vs. 7).

Perhaps we should be interpreting the writer's mind with ac-
curacy if we were to conclude that in Noah, Abel, and Enoch he
has chosen the three examples outside the pale of revealed re-
ligion in the pre-Abrahamic days who best exemplify the fact of
God's redeeming grace and his earnest wish to save aU those who
sincerely turn to him in faith. It is not, however, until we come to
Abraham, "the father of the faithful," that a number of the dis-
tinctively Christian words with which we have become familiar in
the letter are used. These include the ideas of the gospel "call"
(5:4; 9:15), "obedience" and its opposite (3:18; 5:9), "inher-
itance" (6:12; 9:15), "promise" (4:1; 6:12; 7:6; 8:6; 9:15; 10:
23, 36), and even the thought involved in the phrase "to go out"
or "exodus" (3:16; 13:13).

All this means that for the author, as well as for the Jewish
people before him, Abraham occupied a special position of im-
portance in the scheme of the redemption of God's people. With
Abraham it may be said that special revelation began. Moreover,
it began with a "call" to go out from among the people of the
world with a view to occupying a distinctive position in God's
economy of redemption. In both the Old and the New Testaments
a "call" is by no means an abstraction. It does not appear out of
the void or without an author. Rather, the "call" of Scripture al-
ways emanates directly from God. It is significant, too, that to
Abraham as representative of the about-to-be-formed "people of
God" the call came "to go out to a place which he was to receive
as an inheritance" (vs. 8). That is to say, Abraham was called

76 HEBREWS 11:1-40

out of the context (the time-space framework) in which his life
had thus far been lived. His life was now to know new horizons,
to start anew in a place of new perspectives. He was to find "in
the land of promise" a point of vantage from which to view life
as God views it.

The limitless horizons of this place are indicated by the words,
"he went out, not knowing where he was to go." Moreover, that
the place specified is by no means a final fulfillment of the promise
of "an inheritance" is stressed. Abraham was not led, nor were his
descendants, to imagine that the "land of promise" was a total
fulfillment of the promises of God. Rather he looked upon that
land as a "foreign land" in which he and his descendants merely
"sojourned" (vs. 9). The transitory nature of their abode is shown
also in the fact that they were continually "living in tents." God
had directed their eyes to a more permanent abode, in fact, "to
the city which has foundations, whose builder and maker is God"
(vs. 10). The permanence of city life, with its "foundations," as
over against a casual existence "in tents," lends itself admirably
to the contrast which the author wishes to make between the eter-
nal and the transitory (vs. 16).

The use of the concept of a city to describe the permanent char-
acter of the inheritance of God's people is by no means limited to
Hebrews. It is a striking characteristic, for example, of the Reve-
lation to John (Rev. 3:12; 11:2; 20:9; 21:2). The idea no doubt
derives originally from the prophetic thought that "the Lord of
hosts will reign on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem" (Isa. 24:23;
27:13; Micah 4:7). The idea that the people of God are merely
"strangers and exiles on the earth" (vs. 13), and accordingly are
"seeking a homeland" in the eternal order (vs. 14), is also not
new with Hebrews. The thought derives from Genesis 23:4 so
far as Abraham is concerned, and it is related in general to God's
people elsewhere in the Old Testament (Ezek. 20:38). Paul makes
use of the idea in Philippians 3:20 with the remark that "our
commonwealth is in heaven," an expression which suggests that
Christians in the world are, so to speak, colonists abroad from
their homeland!

Throughout the passage, in accordance with the thought ex-
pressed in verses 1 and 2, faith is treated as the instrument by
means of which God's people view the transitory world and all it
contains in true perspective. The phrase "by faith" occurs again
and again like a refrain. For it is only "by faith" that God's people

I

HEBREWS 11:1-40 77

are enabled to assess the transitory and the eternal at their proper
values. There is a very real sense in which in this life they have
not "received what was promised, but having seen and greeted it
from afar" they live their Uves in the perspective of God (vs. 13).

Not alone Abraham, but his wife Sarah as well (vs. 1 1 ) , his son
Isaac, his grandsons Jacob and Esau, and his great-grandson
Joseph (vss. 17-22) are said to have possessed the requisite faith.
Sarah's faith is particularly significant because she had already,
along with Abraham, passed the age when children are expected in
the home (vss. 11-12; see Gen. 17:19; 18:11-14). Abraham was
already "as good as dead." God's faithfulness in fulfilling his
promises (vs. 11), therefore, was shown provisionally in the fact
that from this old couple were bom "descendants as many as the
stars of heaven." Hebrews specifically states, as we have observed,
that this is not the final fulfillment of God's promise to his people
(vs. 13). But the fact is not to be ignored that it does represent a
partial fulfillment — an "earnest" of the final one toward which
God's people may look forward. It is a parable, so to speak, of
life from the dead, which is of the very essence of the salvation
which God holds out for man. And it is not unlike the gift of the
Holy Spirit, which, as Paul observes, is "the guarantee of our in-
heritance until we acquire possession of it" (Eph. 1 : 14).

The incident involving Abraham's testing when he was "ready
to offer up his only son" Isaac (vs. 17) carries essentially the same
thought as that involved in Isaac's birth. In both cases Abraham
"considered that God was able to raise men even from the dead,"
from which, as our author suggests, "figuratively speaking, he did
receive him back" (vss. 17-19). For, however one is to under-
stand the story in its original form at Genesis 22:1-10, in He-
brews it is seen in the light of the promise which God had made
to Abraham — "Through Isaac shall your descendants be named."
This promise Abraham at all times was prepared to beheve, what-
ever the transitory evidence of earthly existence might appear to
suggest to the contrary.

In the case of Abraham's descendants, the incidents chosen for
comment are those concerned with the end of the life of each
when he "blessed" his descendants, and the author's point has to
do with the faith thereby exhibited (vss. 20-22). The stress here,
as previously throughout the chapter, is upon a faith which looks
beyond the immediate horizons to the fulfillment of God's prom-
ises to his people. And it should be observed that in laying stress

78 HEBREWS 11:1-40

upon this faith the author is true to the spirit of the Old Testa-
ment at the points involved (Gen. 27:27-40; 48:21; 50:24-25;
Exod. 13:19). In the case of Joseph, his faith leaps forward to
the Exodus and he gives "directions concerning his burial" in the
land of promise. This mention of "the exodus" from Egypt natur-
ally leads on to the next character with which our author wishes
to deal, namely, the lawgiver Moses.

Abraham and Moses are the two focal points of the Old Testa-
ment revelation. The Christian Church, arising as it did out of the
context of Judaism, inherited the sense of the prominence of these
two Old Testament worthies. (For the importance of Moses see
Mark 9:4-5; John 3:14; Acts 3:22; Revelation 15:3.)

There was, however, from the beginning this marked difference
between Judaism and the Christian faith with reference to the
parts played by Abraham and Moses. For Pharisaism, the domi-
nant school of thought in the Judaism of the first century, Moses
played the more prominent part, and his ministry served as a
norm by which to gauge all of the revelation under the Old Cove-
nant, including that made to Abraham. Accordingly, Abraham
was interpreted in the light of the revelation which Judaism held
to have come through Moses. He was said, for example, to have
fulfilled the Law in its entirety before Moses appeared on the
scene. His perfection, or salvation, was said to have occurred only
after his circumcision and because of it. In the Early Church,
however, the roles of these two were reversed. Abraham became
the standard, so that the Law given to Moses was to be understood
in the light of the revelation which came to Abraham. Paul spoke
of this revelation as the "gospel" (Gal. 3:8) and averred that the
Law, which came 430 years afterward, could not annul the Cove-
nant previously ratified by God with Abraham (Gal. 3:17); while
in opposition to the viewpoint of Pharisaism cited above, he ar-
gued that "faith was reckoned to Abraham as righteousness . . .
before he was circumcised" (Rom. 4:9-10).

It need not surprise us, then, that Hebrews at this point is not
concerned about the Law which was promulgated through Moses
but rather about his "faith." Moreover, it was faith and the cour-
age born of it which the author sees exemplified in the parents of
Moses (vs. 23), by the people who followed Moses' leadership at
the Exodus, by the army of Israel in the conquest of Canaan as at
Jericho (vss. 29-30) , and by Rahab the harlot who gave assistance
to the two spies sent in to spy out the land (vs. 31).

HEBREWS 11:1-40 79

It is noteworthy that in his account of Moses' "choosing rather
to share ill-treatment with the people of God than to enjoy the
fleeting pleasures of sin" (vs. 25) , our author suggests that he was
prepared to suffer "for the Christ" (vs. 26) . The New Testament
writers in general look back and see all previous events in the re-
demptive history of the people of God in the light of Christ. Ac-
cordingly, it is the author's viewpoint that Moses' sufferings can be
thought of as eventually for Christ's sake, because Moses as the
leader of God's people was in the divine succession of events ex-
perienced by that people, a succession whose culminating event
was to be Christ.

This interpretation runs parallel, then, with the author's view
of Abraham. For on the one hand he can speak of him as one who,
"having patiently endured, obtained the promise" (6:15), and on
the other as numbered among all those who "though well attested
by their faith, did not receive what was promised" (11 :39). That
is to say, Hebrews sees both a proximate and a remote fulfillment
of God's promises to his people at aU times. And to this phenom-
enon neither Abraham nor Moses is an exception. Abraham did
receive the promise in the sense that "he sojourned in the land of
promise" (vs. 9); but in a larger sense he was numbered among
all those who "died in faith, not having received what was prom-
ised, but having seen it and greeted it from afar" (vs. 13). In like
manner for the author, Moses was rewarded through a long period
of years with the leadership of God's people, but in a real sense
the remote possession was never obtained by him; rather, "he en-
dured as seeing him who is invisible" (vs. 27).

And now the author concludes his argument with a summary
statement, because, as he suggests, "time would fail" him to give
a complete account of all the Old Testament worthies who ex-
emplified the response of faith which God desires of man (vs. 32).
His summary is a very comprehensive one. Following the con-
quest of Canaan, which is suggested by his choice of Rahab (vs.
31), he begins with the judges — Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jephthah
(vs. 32) — and then proceeds to David as God's choice for setting
up the theocracy in Israel, and comprehends the entire Hebrew
prophetic movement in the words "Samuel and the prophets" (vs.
32). Thereafter, in verses 33-38, he summarizes the experiences
of the faithful throughout the period of the remaining Old Testa-
ment and Intertestament literature.

Most, if not all, of the references can be identified, and they in-

80 HEBREWS 11:1-40

troduce us to a wide range of characters whose lives exemphfied
the faith with which the author is dealing. Thus, of those "who
through faith conquered kingdoms" he may very well have in
mind men like Joshua and David. Those who "enforced justice"
would very properly include the judges and kings like David and
Solomon. Daniel is obviously one who "stopped the mouths of
lions" (Dan. 6:21-23). Perhaps he and his associates in Babylon
are also in mind as those who "quenched raging fire" (Dan. 3:
23-25). According to Isaiah, Hezekiah by the faith shown in his
prayer was the means of putting Sennacherib and his armies to
flight (II Kings 19:20-37). The widow of Zarephath and the
Shunammite woman are examples of the women who "received
their dead by resurrection" (I Kings 17:8-24; II Kings 4:18-37).
A number of the prophets were "tortured" (see Matt. 5:11-12),
notably Jeremiah (Jer., chs. 20, 37-38). Zechariah, the son of
Jehoiada, was stoned (II Chron. 24:21). According to an apoc-
ryphal book, Isaiah the prophet was among those who were "sawn
in two" (Ascension of Isaiah 5:11-14). Verses 35b-38, indeed,
sound very much like a summary of the treatment which Israel and
the pagan world gave to the Hebrew prophets. Elijah, for example,
in the treatment accorded to him by King Ahab of Israel may very
well be in the writer's mind as one who went "wandering over
deserts and mountains, and in dens and caves of the earth" (I
Kings, chs. 18-19).

In the concluding paragraph (vss. 39-40), the author sum-
marizes in a brief statement the point which the entire chapter is
intended to illustrate. This is twofold: first, that the reward of faith
is never immediately realized. For none of these Old Testament
saints received the fulfillment of the promise in its final form. Had
it been otherwise, then faith would no longer be faith. For, as the
author indicated in the opening paragraph of the chapter, faith
places one outside the boundaries of time and space whence one
may view the distant scene, but while one lives within those
boundaries only proximate realization of the promises of God may
ever be experienced. Second, faith always has in view, as does the
promise itself, that great company of the faithful whose arrival
on the plane of history must precede the fulfillment of the prom-
ises. This is the true "communion of the saints" — a fellowship, not
alone among those existing at any moment upon the earth, but
extending horizontally throughout time, an ever-widening circle of
men and women responding by faith to the promises of God.

HEBREWS 12:1-2 81

Exhortation to Endurance as Sons (12:1-29)

The Endurance of the Pioneer and Perfecter of Our Faith (12:1-2)

Hebrews now turns more particularly to the response required
of its readers to the high-priestly work of the Son of God. The
author thinks of the ancient heroes of faith as a great "cloud of
witnesses" surrounding the contemporary generation of the Chris-
tian community. His words suggest that he has in mind the specta-
tors in an amphitheater viewing the athletic games of the day, or
those who have already run their part of the race. It is to be noted,
however, that he does not ask his readers to keep their attention
riveted upon this "cloud of witnesses." In point of fact, any athlete
who did that would never win the race. The athlete keeps his at-
tention upon the goal post or, alternatively, upon the runner who
is at the head of the race. Similarly, the readers are exhorted to
continue "looking to Jesus the pioneer and perfecter of our faith."
For it is clear that it is Jesus who sets the pace and determines the
goal of the Christian race.

The worst impediment in the Christian race is the "sin which
clings so closely" to every runner. The King James Version at this
point translated, "the sin which doth so easily beset us," and as a
result there is a popular conception among Christians that each
person has a different "besetting sin." But this is certainly not the
meaning of the author. There is nothing in the Greek to suggest a
particularly besetting sin attaching to one Christian rather than
another. The author is exhorting his readers to lay aside "every
weight" deriving from background, experience, education, and
contemporary culture, as well as the "sin" common to all mankind,
in order that they may run without hindrance the race of the Chris-
tian life.

As has been said previously in more ways than one, "persever-
ance" is required in order that the race may be brought to a suc-
cessful conclusion (see 3:6, 14; 10:36) . The Christian is not asked
to run in a spectacular fashion, putting on now and again a spurt
of speed with a view to making an impression upon spectators. It
is rather a sort of dogged stick-to-it-iveness to which the author
exhorts his readers. In so doing he is in line with other New Testa-
ment writers, notably with Paul (Rom. 2:7; 5:3; 8:25; II Cor.
6:4; Col. 1:11), James ( 1 : 3-4) , II Peter (1:6), and Revelation
(1:9;2:2; 3:10). This is not an exhaustive list, but it is sufficient

82 HEBREWS 12:1-2

to show that the New Testament writers considered "perseverance"
("endurance," "steadfastness," "patience") to be one of the pri-
mary "fruits of the Spirit" observable in the Christian life. And
inasmuch as such endurance relates to every expression of the
Christian faith, it would scarcely be too much to say that it is the
all-inclusive fruitage of the Christian experience.

The description which Hebrews gives of Jesus in this passage
as "the pioneer and perfecter of our faith" is a notable one. No-
where else in the New Testament is the term "perfecter" employed
with regard to our Lord, and only the Book of Acts also speaks of
him as "pioneer." In Acts 3:15 the Greek word is translated
"Author" ("of life"), and the context suggests that Luke is im-
pressed with the strange paradox that he who is "the Author of
life" has himself been "killed" by unruly and ungodly men. At
Acts 5:31, however, the same word is translated "Leader," and
there it is combined with the term "Savior."

The expression "Leader and Savior" rather closely approximates
that in the present passage. And it is notable that in 2:10 the
author combines all three ideas of leadership, salvation, and per-
fection in one phrase relating to Jesus ("the pioneer of their sal-
vation perfect through suffering"). Certainly, in the present im-
agery of the race course, "pioneer" is to be taken in the sense of
"leader" of the race, that is, of the runner who is far ahead in the
Christian way of life. It is toward such a one that the other run-
ners in the Christian way may look for guidance, for leadership,
for encouragement, and above all as the goal to be reached. In
Ephesians 4:13 Paul expressed the same idea, but under an en-
tirely different figure, in the words, "until we all attain ... to
mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of
Christ."

This is not to say that as "pioneer and perfecter" of our faith
Jesus is merely another runner in the Christian race. To be the
leader, the one who sets out the course, is to be far above all others
who come after and who foUow his pattern. Of no other than the
Leader of the faith may it be said that he has "endured the cross,
despising the shame, and is seated at the right hand of the throne
of God." Strangely enough, nowhere else does the author speak
of either "the cross" or "the shame" of our Lord, but both ideas
have constantly been before us.

Finally, in this passage "the race that is set before us" is paral-
leled with "the joy that was set before him." The expressions are

HEBREWS 12:3-11 83

exactly parallel in the Greek construction as in the English, and
this can scarcely be without iatention on the author's part. The
race stretches out before us even as the joy stretched out before
Jesus as he looked to the goal which his Father had set before him
in his human life (see 2:9). Probably the meaning, therefore, is
that just as he "endured," so should we, both he and we having in
mind at all times the high goal set before us by the Father.

The Place of Discipline in Christian Growth (12:3-11)

It is in the context of the idea of Jesus' sufferings that a main
theme of the letter is again taken up. The same theme appears in
2:5-18. There the point is made that it is fitting that God, "in
bringing many sons to glory, should make the pioneer of their
salvation perfect through suffering" (2:10) . In the present passage
the theme of sonship is elaborated in the same context of suffering
(vs. 2). Jesus, whom the "sons" are to emulate, has "endured the
cross, despising the shame." It is appropriate in such a context for
the author to remind his readers that they "have not yet resisted
to the point of shedding . . . blood" (vs. 4). Jesus has endured
great "hostility against himself," no doubt of the type which the
readers of the letter are now facing (vs. 3).

Obviously, neither the shame of the Cross in Jesus' case nor
the hostility now being directed against the readers is the direct
work of God. Rather, it is clearly the work of "sinners" (vs. 3) in
the case of Jesus; and it is the "sin" of the race against which
the readers have to "struggle" (vs. 4) . Ultimately the sin in both
cases is that of man in his rebellion against God, his Anointed
One, and God's people.

And yet, viewed in the perspective of God's redemptive pur-
pose relative to man, both Jesus' sufferings as the Son and those
of the "sons" (vss. 5-11) must be thought of as somehow within the
divine will and purpose. The author has already expressed the
idea that God was behind the suffering of Jesus with a view to
making "the pioneer of their salvation perfect" (2:10; see 2: 17-18
and 5:8-10). In hke manner, it is now to be observed that the
"sons" are being asked to endure the "discipline" which will even-
tuate in their maturing. For such discipline in the end "yields the
peaceful fruit of righteousness to those who have been trained by
it" (vs. 11).

It is significant that both in the present passage (see vs. 4) , and
at 10:32-39, wherein the author refers to the persecutions suf-

84 HEBREWS 12:12-17

fered and about to be suffered by his readers, he makes it clear
that none of them has as yet died for the faith. It is difficult, if
not impossible, to believe that either of these persecutions, there-
fore, has reference to that suffered by the church at Rome under
Nero, when, as Tacitus remarks, burning Christians ht up the
gardens of that emperor.

It is perhaps also not without significance that Hebrews calls
upon the Wisdom Literature (Prov. 3:11-12) to substantiate his
point with regard to God's disciplining of the "sons." This pas-
sage is also quoted in Revelation 3:19 in connection with the
chastisement about to be meted out to the church at Laodicea. The
Wisdom Literature was particularly popular among the Hellenistic
Jews from whom we believe the author and his readers to have
emerged.

The central point of the passage is contained in verses 10 and
1 1 — discipline of his "sons" on God's part leads to their sharing
"his hohness" (vs. 10) or to "the peaceful fruit of righteousness"
(vs. 11). As we have already observed, it was natural for our
author, with his stress upon the high-priestly activity of our Lord,
to view salvation in terms of sanctification or of the consecration
of his people for the worship of God (see 2-11; 9:13-14; 10:10,
14, 29). The priestly writer in Leviticus 19:2, in much the same
spirit, had reported God as saying, "You shall be holy; for I the
Lord your God am holy. ' In view of his present discussion of the
merits of discipline, it needs no proof that the author of Hebrews,
too, is thinking of the "sons" sharing the moral "holiness" which
is God's. And we may conclude also, in view of the juxtaposition
of verses 10 and 11, that the term "righteousness" is to be under-
stood here as virtually a synonym for "holiness."

The Need of Direction in the Christian Life (12:12-17)

The sons are not to suppose that their share in the matter of
acquiring salvation is a merely passive one. The author turns again
to Proverbs 4:26 (in the Greek version) with a view to suggesting
that the sons are to make straight paths for their feet (vs. 13).
However, he now joins to this quotation another (vs. 12) from
Isaiah 35:3, taken from a chapter devoted by the prophet to
describing the glories of the restored land to which a repentant
Israel should return, over a "highway" which the prophet calls
"the Holy Way" (35:8). It would be only "the ransomed of the
Lord" who would in this way return to Zion (35: 10). These ran-

HEBREWS 12:18-24 85

somed are variously described by Isaiah as "the blind," "the deaf,"
"the lame man," and "the dumb" (35:5-6), and among them
are not included "the unclean" and "fools" (35:8-9). That the
direction of the Christian way of which Hebrews is speaking leads,
like Isaiah's "Holy Way," up to Zion is the theme of the next
section (vss. 18-24).

In the meantime, those traveling by the Holy Way are to "strive
for peace with all men, and for the holiness without which no one
will see the Lord" (vs. 14). The idea that peace between God and
man and between man and his neighbor is an accompaniment of
salvation is a commonplace in Hebrew prophetic thought (Ps.
85:10; Isa. 57:19). The reference to "holiness" recalls what has
been said above in verse 10. But it is Ukely that the background
of the thought here is Psahn 24:4, where the psalmist declares
that only those who have "clean hands and a pure heart" may
have a share in the worship of the true and living God.

The reference to the "root of bitterness" and to the immorality
or irreligious nature of one hke Esau (vss. 15-16) recalls what has
already been said in chapters 3 and 4 with regard to the rebellion
of Israel against God at the time of the Exodus. It is essentially
such rebellion or disobedience which our author accounts to be
man's chief sin (3 : 1 6-19) . It is rebels who "fail to obtain the grace
of God" (vs. 15) , and it is against such sin that the sons need to be
warned that they may maintain proper direction along the Chris-
tian way of life.

Mount Zion and the Christian Way (12:18-24)

The author now gives the ultimate reason why the Christian's
attitude is fundamentally different from that of a man like Esau.
He has already suggested that the Christian should not be known
for his "drooping hands" and "weak knees" (vs. 12), that his path
always be made "straight" in order that the "lame" who accom-
pany him might find it easy to walk in (vs. 13). This attitude, as
we have seen, is contrasted with the "bitterness" which character-
ized Esau.

Justification for this exhortation lies in the fundamental differ-
ence of spirit characterizing the Old Covenant and the New. The
Old Covenant had been given at Mount Sinai under most terrify-
ing conditions. The description of those conditions in verses 18-21
actually employs many of the very words of the Greek trans-
lation of Exodus 19 and Deuteronomy 4 and 5. Little wonder

86 HEBREWS 12:18-24

that the incident brought fear to the hearts of the Israelites when
even their leader remarked, "I tremble with fear" (vs. 21).

By contrast (vs. 22) the author places the New Covenant and
its confirmation at another mountain (Zion) and the city associ-
ated with it (Jerusalem). The origin of this idea no doubt goes
back to Isaiah 28:16:

"Behold, I am laying in Zion for a foundation

a stone, a tested stone,
a precious cornerstone, of a sure foundation:

'He who beUeves will not be in haste.' "

This thought and the accompanying one that the Messiah himself
wiU appear upon Mount Zion, having ridden through the gates of
the Holy City, is taken up in Isaiah 62:11 and Zechariah 9:9.
In turn, these become themes to be worked out in detail by var-
ious New Testament writers (Matt. 21:5; John 12: 15; Rom. 9:33;
I Peter 2:6; and Rev, 14:1). The adjective "heavenly" which is
employed in connection with Jerusalem (vs. 22), however, makes
it clear that the author, as so often, is employing figurative lan-
guage (see 4:16; 10:22).

The Mount Zion and "the city of the living God, the heavenly
Jerusalem" at which Christians have arrived is none other than
the "city which has foundations, whose builder and maker is God"
to which Abraham looked forward (11:10). For Christians have
arrived. In spirit they are already inhabitants of "the city of the
Uving God" and their companions are the "innumerable angels"
and the "assembly of the first-bom," that is, all those who through
the centuries have in one way and another been God's true ser-
vants (vss. 22-23). "Assembly" is the ordinary Greek word for
"church." It might very well be translated "congregation," for the
reference is clearly to the people of God gathered together like a
mighty congregation and including those who through the cen-
turies have turned away from a spirit of "bitterness," accepting
rather that fellowship which God holds out to man. The word
translated "first-bom" is one which the New Testament employs
almost exclusively for Jesus Christ himself (Rom. 8 :29; Col. 1:15,
18; Heb. 1:6; Rev. 1:5). Only in Luke 2:7 and Hebrews 11:28
is it used in the natural sense of the first child to be bom into any
human family. The present passage, therefore, stands by itself in
New Testament usage and finds its meaning somewhere between
the natural usage of the word and its special application to Jesus

HEBREWS 12:25-29 87

Christ. Christians are "first-bom" in the sense that, reflecting the
character of their Lord, they occupy a position of eminence among
men; they are "just men made perfect," a really mature assem-
blage. This is the "communion of the saints" — ^the real people of
God who know fellowship among themselves regardless of the
barriers of time and place and rank, of color and race, which
have separated men through the centuries.

The Christian's Call to an Unshakable Kingdom (12:25-29)

And now Hebrews returns to the thought of "a heavenly call"
as issued to the readers, along with those under the Old Cove-
nant, which was discussed in 3:6b — 4:16. As before, there are
very solemn terms warning of the danger of refusing "him who
is speaking" to the Christian community (vs. 25). The argument,
"if they did not escape . . . much less shall we escape" (vs. 25),
is essentially that which was employed at 2:2-3 and 10:28-29.
The reference in "him who warned them on earth" is obviously to
Moses (10:28), while as surely he "who warns from heaven" is
Jesus Christ. The latter is not a priest "on earth" as Moses and the
descendants of Aaron his brother were (8:4), but is rather "from
heaven" since it is there that his ministry is accomplished (8:2;
9:11-12). The quotation in verse 26 is from Haggai 2:6 and is
evidently intended as a comprehensive statement, indicative of the
universal and eternal character of the ministry of our Lord.

But the "kingdom" which Christians receive "cannot be shaken"
(vs. 28). It is not transitory but eternal. The phraseology in the
first part of this verse is striking for two reasons: first, because
this is only the second reference to the "kingdom" to be found in
the letter as a whole. The other appears at 1:8 in the quotation
from Psalm 45:6-7. As we have seen, the major argument of
Hebrews relates to the high priesthood of Jesus Christ. The pres-
ent passage, however, linked as it is with the argument in 1:8,
indicates that our Lord's kingship is never far from the author's
mind. His high priesthood is based upon his sovereignty over the
universe of which he is heir as Son (1:2). Second, the verse is
significant because it speaks of Christians as "receiving" the king-
dom, a term commonly employed in Judaism and carried over
into the Christian Church. In Luke's Gospel, in fact, our Lord
remarks to his "little flock": "It is your Father's good pleasure to
give you the kingdom" (Luke 12:32). This saying occurs in Luke
alone, but it follows immediately after the exhortation to "seek

88 HEBREWS 13:1-17

his kingdom" (vs. 31), which is found also in Matthew 6:33. In
all of these passages, including that immediately before us, the
thought is that of accepting the sovereignty of God over one's
life. In this passage such acceptance of God's sovereignty is a pre-
condition to man's offering "to God acceptable worship."

The Communal Life of God's People Outside the Gate
(13:1-17)

There is quite clearly a change in tempo between the im-
mediately preceding sections and the one which here lies before
us. From 10:19 through 12:29 the author conceives of the Chris-
tian life in terms of movement. The community is on the march,
and the stress is upon the "faith" that undergirds progress and the
"hope" which fastens upon the goal at the end of the road. In
the present section, on the other hand, our author views the Chris-
tian brotherhood in its settled communal life. The keynote of such
communal existence is "love," and it is now "love" which is the
dominant factor in the community and which determines its char-
acter and Hfe.

Rapidly the author deals with six social relationships in which
"love" should be the dominant motif. These include one's relations
to (1) one's brother in the Christian community (vs. 1), (2) the
stranger without (vs. 2), (3) those who are persecuted (vs. 3),
(4) one's married partner (vs. 4), (5) possessions (vss. 5-6),
and (6) Christian leaders (vss. 7, 17). Between verses 7 and 17
there is an interlude (vss. 8-16), dealing with the Christian's suf-
fering with Jesus Christ "outside the gate."

In verses 1 and 2 two comprehensive words for "love" cover
one's proper relationships with those both within and outside the
Christian community — "brotherly love" and "hospitality to stran-
gers." In the Greek there is quite clearly a play on these words, both
of which are rarely used in the New Testament. The former, in-
deed, occurs elsewhere only in Romans 12:10; I Thessalonians
4:9; I Peter 1 :22; and II Peter 1:7; while the latter is found only
in Romans 12:13. Indeed, it is noteworthy that in Romans 12:
10-14, the two ideas of love toward those within and without the
Christian community and endurance in the hour of persecution
are present together in the mind of Paul as in that of the author of
Hebrews. This fact may be coincidental, or it possibly suggests a

HEBREWS 13:1-17 89

knowledge of Romans on his part. In either case, the passages are
one in testifying to a consciousness on the part of the Christian
community of being a little island in the midst of a sea of pagan-
ism.

It is clear, however, that the situation of the readers of He-
brews is quite different from that of the readers of Romans 12.
There the "strangers" are Christians, as verse 13 makes clear; here
it is at least Ukely that the "strangers" are those outside the Chris-
tian community. The fact that "some have entertained angels
unawares" refers to Abraham's experience as recorded in Genesis
18:1-8. Moreover, in Romans 12: 14 it is Christians who are per-
secuted, whereas in the present passage there is no suggestion that
"those who are in prison" and "those who are ill-treated" are
Christians (vs. 3). It is a compassionate humanitarianism, spring-
ing from the Christian's sense of weakness which he shares with
all those who are "in the body," that Hebrews has in mind.

The author's attitude toward the subjects of "marriage" and
"money" in verses 4 and 5 is to be contrasted with the attitude of
the Qumran sect as expressed in its scriptures. The asceticism
practiced at Khirbet Qumran is in marked contrast with the au-
thor's injunction that "marriage be held in honor among aU" (vs.
4). It is true that there was no compulsion on members of the sect
tx> live a celibate life, and accordiug both to Josephus and to the
scroUs, there were those who lived a married life in the various
cities and villages throughout Israel. Nonetheless, within the sect
asceticism was the ideal. On the contrary, the Christian ideal, as
expressed in verse 4, is that of a married state which is maintained
on a high moral and spiritual level. It is the sexual aberrations of
immorality and adultery which God will judge; married life itself
is clearly recognized as normative and proper.

Similarly, unlike the Qumran sect, there is here no thought of
adopting a communal view of one's possessions. Any who joined
the monastic life of the community at Khirbet Qumran were com-
pelled to surrender aU of their wealth. For the writer of Hebrews,
the Christian ideal is to keep one's life "free from love of money,
and be content with what you have" (vs. 5). The Christian's atti-
tude toward all things is to be motivated by the sense of God's
providential care of his people (vss. 5-6; see Ps. 118:6).

The word translated "leaders" in verses 7, 17, and 24 is de-
rived from the same stem that provides the Greek word elsewhere
translated "governor" (for example, Matt. 10:18; Luke 20:20;

90 HEBREWS 13:1-17

Acts 23:24). In verse 7 such "leaders" are defined as those
through whom "the word of God" had come to the readers. The
word is used in exactly the same way in Acts 14:12 with refer-
ence to the Apostle Paul, and in Acts 15:22 it is applied to Judas
and Silas, the two messengers sent by the church at Jerusalem to
the church at Syrian Antioch at the close of the Jerusalem Coun-
cil. Its use here, therefore, would suggest an early stage in the
history of the community addressed, when the organization was
still loose and discipline was not rigidly enforced. Possibly two
sets of such "leaders" are in view, the first consisting of the early
group who had evangelized the conmiunity at the beginning (vs.
7), and the second of more permanent "leaders" to whom sub-
mission was to be granted in view of the fact that they were
"keeping watch over your souls" (vs. 17).

Reference to the "leaders" through whom his readers have been
evangelized with "the word of God" leads the author again to
ponder upon the central message of the letter, and he repeats that
message now with a pertinent exhortation (vss. 8-16). Jesus
Christ, who is the center of the gospel message, is the eternal sac-
rifice for sin offered up, as we have seen, "to sanctify the people
through his own blood" (vs. 12; see 9:13-14; 10:10, 14, 29).
The "altar" on which he was sacrificed provides food for "grace"
which is not available to contemporary Judaism ("those who serve
the tent," vs. 10). Such food and such grace are sufficient for
Christians, who are, therefore, to put aside all "diverse and strange
teachings" with reference to foods which were supposed to bene-
fit their adherents (vs. 9). What these teachings were we have no
certain way of knowing. Contemporary Judaism had many stipu-
lations derived from the Law and Pharisaic traditions with re-
gard to "clean and unclean" meats or food. The Qumran sect also
had such teachings of its own. There is reference to something of
the sort also in the peculiarly gnostic teachings to which Paul
makes reference in Colossians 2:16-23.

The remark about Jesus' suffering "outside the gate" and the
consequent necessity that Christians should "go forth to him out-
side the camp, bearing abuse for him" (vss. 12-13) appears to re-
flect a time when the Christian community was faced with the
necessity of breaking away from the older Judaism with its center
in the holy city of Jerusalem. Christians "have no lasting city"
but, like their spiritual father Abraham, "seek the city which is
to come" (vs. 14; see 11:10, 16). Following the death of the

HEBREWS 13:18-25 91

martyred Stephen, the Hellenistic-Jewish Christians were scattered
as a direct result of persecution arising in the mother city, Jeru-
salem (Acts 8:1). Also at the beginning of the First Jewish War
(a.d. 66), according to the early church historian Eusebius, the
members of the Jewish-Christian community escaped from the
city of Jerusalem and fled across the Jordan to Pella. In the light
of the teaching of Hebrews as a whole, however, it is probable that
neither of these two events is specifically referred to in the pres-
ent passage. Rather, the author hkely has in mind the necessary
cleavage being drawn between the Christian Church and contem-
porary Judaism, which was the natural result of the exclusive
high priesthood of the Son of God. Jewish Christians are not to
cling to or Uve in the Jewish side of their faith. Rather, as Jesus
himself was excluded from his people so they are to bear "abuse
for him" (vs. 13). The Christian's highest duty is to "offer up a
sacrifice of praise to God," praise which consists in witnessing to
"his name" in the world (vs. 15).

EPISTOLARY CONCLUSION

Hebrews 13:18-25

The epistolary conclusion contains a benediction, perhaps the
most beautiful to be found in the New Testament (vss. 20-21).
The term "God of peace," which is a Pauline phrase (Rom. 15:
33; 16:20; II Cor. 13:11; Phil. 4:9; I Thess. 5:23), means "the
God who brings peace or salvation"; "peace" in Hebrew is one
of the words which are the equivalent of "salvation" (Isa. 52:7).
The idea that God raised up "our Lord Jesus" is also a Pauline
idea (I Cor. 15:15), though not exclusively so (see Acts 2:24,
32). That Jesus is the "shepherd of the sheep" is an idea explic-
itly stated in John 10:2 and implied in Mark 6:34. It has numer-
ous Old Testament associations, where God (Ps. 23:1), or
alternatively his Messiah (Micah 5:4), is declared to be the shep-
herd of his people. The benediction is essentially a prayer that God
will properly equip his "sons" so that they may do his will in the
manner set forth in the letter. This can come only "through Jesus
Christ."

In verse 22 the author defines his work as both "my word of
exhortation" and a letter written to his readers. This would seem
to suggest that the document is first of all a theological discussion,

92 HEBREWS 13:18-25

and that in order to present it to his readers the author sent it to
them, with perhaps an accompanying letter.

In closing he makes two references of a personal nature, one
to Timothy, whom we know to have been close to Paul toward the
end of his career while in prison (Phil. 1:1; 2:19; Col. 1:1), al-
though there is no other account of Timothy's having suffered im-
prisonment. The author of Hebrews seems to be speaking out of
personal knowledge of Timothy's movements. Hebrews also
speaks of "those who come from Italy," possibly a reference to
Hellenistic- Jewish Christians.

The letter closes with the brief prayer, "Grace be with all of
you." In common with many of the New Testament letters the
writer thus reminds his readers of the grace which binds them to
one another and to God.

THE LETTER OF

JAMES

INTRODUCTION

Historical and Literary Problems

Authorship

Since early in the third century the Church has tradition-
ally held that the "James" (Hebrew and Greek "Jacob") named
here was the brother of Jesus (Mark 6:3). He was for many years
the head of the church at Jerusalem (Acts 15: 13-21), and should
not be confused with the son of Zebedee who was put to death
under Herod Agrippa I, about a.d. 46 (Acts 12:1-2). The name,
however, was a common one and it is notable that the author
merely describes himself as "a servant of God and of the Ix>rd
Jesus Christ" (1:1). This has led to speculation that the work is
either pseudonymous (that is, written in the name of the Lord's
brother by someone wishing to issue the letter under the cloak of
his authority — an unlikely theory, since in such case the real
author would certainly have been at pains to indicate more spe-
cifically who the James intended was!) or else is by an unknown
James who was no more than he claims to be.

When certain characteristics of the book itself are examined,
these appear to many to be damaging to the traditional theory of
its authorship. For example, the author never quotes from the Old
Testament save in the form it assumes in the Greek translation
(Septuagint) — a fact not too damaging in itself, since he was
writing for Greek-speaking readers. But when to this fact is added
another — namely, that the Greek of this letter is some of the best
vernacular Greek to be found in the New Testament — it would
seem either that the author was quite familiar with Greek, or else
that he employed an amanuensis, and of this latter there is no
evidence. It is even thought that 1 : 17a is a hexameter Une quoted
from a Greek author. It scarcely needs saying that James the
brother of Jesus, a Galilean by birth, would have spoken Aramaic

94 JAMES : INTRODUCTION

as did all Palestinian Jews in his day and would not likely have
been bilingual to the extent required by such evidence as this.

There are, however, certain facts to be placed on the other side
of the ledger: (1) the very lack of any attempt to designate his
status in his salutation (1:1) argues for the author's being someone
well known for his prestige and authority; (2) the only "James"
so qualifying was the Lord's brother, head of the Jerusalem church
(Acts 15) and a man no doubt of real ability, as his high station
would suggest; (3) numerous passages (1:2-4; 1:5-8; 1:9-11; 2:5,
9-13; 3:5-10; 3:18; 4:7-10; 4:11-12; 4:17; 5:1-6; 5:12) suggest that
the author was well acquainted with Jesus' teaching in the form it
early assumed, before the Gospels were written; indeed, 5:12
probably represents an accurate knowledge of the Aramaic idiom
used by Jesus, as Matthew 5:37 does not; (4) the stress on the
ethical implications of the gospel and the fact that it is termed
"the perfect law ... of liberty" (1:25) are in accord with what
we should expect from a Hebraic- Jewish Christian like the head of
the Jerusalem church, as is the combination of prayer and for-
giveness of sins with anointing and healing (5:13-15; see Mark
2:5); (5) numerous parallels have been pointed out between the
contents of the letter and the texts of the Qumran community
(1:2-8; 1:17; and others), a fact which would accord with the
writing of the letter in the context of the influence of and interest
aroused by the Qumran community settled so near to Jerusalem.

In the light of these considerations we may well assume that the
traditional authorship remains the best hypothesis proposed to
date. Exact knowledge is thus far unobtainable as to how far a
native of "Galilee of the Gentiles" like James may have been ac-
quainted with the Greek language. If he wrote it even passably,
assistance from another who knew it as his native tongue would
have made it possible for him to eliminate Semitisms from his
manuscript, as the like authorship on a joint basis by "native" and
"foreigner" in modem languages serves to demonstrate.

Readers

If, as is suggested in the comment on 1 :2-8, this piece of litera-
ture was first delivered as a sermon and afterward sent out to a
wider audience as a letter, it may well be that James' hearers were
Christians in Jerusalem. It is likely, however, that "the twelve
tribes in the dispersion" to whom it was sent out later included all
in the "new Israel of God," whether Jews or Gentiles.

I

JAMES: INTRODUCTION 95

This double reference of the letter in its final form, together
with the character of the hearers whom James at first had in mind,
would account for certain features that otherwise appear puzzling.
Thus, while the letter is written in excellent vernacular Greek
which at times approaches the literary style of the day and be-
trays little if any evidence of being "translation Greek," the condi-
tion of the church(es) addressed seems more applicable to those
established among Jews in Jerusalem than among Gentiles. For
their "assembly" the Greek word "synagogue" is employed (2:2),
a term used of Christians nowhere else in the New Testament;
and the presence of a rich man at the worship service is suffi-
ciently rare to occasion considerable flurry — a phenomenon likely
in Jerusalem where the early Jewish Christians were notably poor
(Acts 24:17; Rom. 15:25-27; I Cor. 16:1-4; see the comment on
James 2:6-7). Certain cultural features, too, suggest that a Jewish
group was addressed, especially the injunctions relative to the
treatment of the sick (5:13-15). As already mentioned, certain fea-
tures of the teaching also suggest contact with the Qumran com-
munity. This would, of course, be the natural lot of the Jewish
church in Jerusalem.

On the other hand, the statement that it is the rich "who blas-
pheme that honorable name" by which the readers are called (2:7)
is reminiscent of the fact that "the disciples were for the first time
called Christians" at Syrian Antioch (Acts 11:26; see I Peter
4:16). This verse might, therefore, represent a touch added for
the wider circle of James' readers. These and like features of this
little sermon-letter suggest a dual character of Jewish and Gen-
tile hearers and readers such as might have been addressed by a
Christian writer at any time after the inception of the Gentile mis-
sion of Paul.

Date

The letter has been assigned a very late date by interpreters who
do not believe it to be the work of James the Lord's brother. By
others it has been thought perhaps the earliest New Testament
book, written even as early as a.d. 49. The late date is suggested
largely by reason of the scarcity of evidence for its use. It is pos-
sible, however, that I Peter 1:1-2 contains the first turn of a
phrase to show any leaning on James (1:1), in which case the
letter might have been written shortly before a.d. 67 or even dur-
ing that year. It could, however, be cogently argued that both let-

96 James: introductiont

ters draw upon the cx)inmon stock of Christian phraseology em-
ployed by the Early Church in Jerusalem and might, accordingly,
be given an identical date.

Accepting the authorship by James, we would place the compo-
sition of the letter in Jerusalem sometime before the opening of the
First Jewish War (a.d. 66-70), possibly about a.d. 65. This would
allow for James to have heard of the Judaizing objections to Paul's
doctrine of justification by grace through faith (Rom. 3 and 4;
Gal. 3) and for a desire on his part to correct the misinterpreta-
tion of Paul's writings (particularly Romans) thus involved (see
2:14-26).

The early center of the Christian faith had been Jerusalem (Acts
1-12), and the head of the church there would continue to think
of it as the hub of all things Christian, with every other part of
Christendom resulting from the Gentile mission qualifying as "dis-
persion" to his mind! Peter, following in Paul's steps to Rome,
would have learned to see matters rather differently (I Peter 1 : 1-2).
Perhaps we should see a hint of this attitude in the lack of any ad-
dress in the letter attributed to James in Acts 15: 23-29 (see also
15:13, 19-21).

Contents

The theme of the letter, despite much writing to the contrary,
appears to be salvation in several of its aspects. These include:
salvation from the trials and temptations presented by life to the
believer in Jesus Christ, the ethical implications for Christian liv-
ing which such salvation entails, and the eternal aspects of salva-
tion which one can either see or foresee on the historical plane.

JAMES: OUTLINE 97

OUTLINE

Salutation. James i:i

Salvation from Life's Trials and Temptations. James 1:2-27

Faith — the Means or Way (1:2-8)

Salvation (the Crown of Life)— God's Gift (1:9-18)

God's Word— the Power (1:19-27)

Salvation's Implications for Social and Personal Living. James
2:1 — 5:6

Inconsistency of Faith with Partiality (2:1-13)
Relation of Faith to Works (2:14-26)
Opposition Between God's Word and Man's Word (3:1-18)
Opposition Between Passion and Humility (4:1 — 5:6)

Salvation in the Light of Eternity. James 5:7-20

Endurance Until the Lord's Coming (5:7-11)
Oaths and the Judgment (5:12)
Prayer and Healing (5:13-18)
Conversion of the Sinner (5:19-20)

98 JAMES 1:1

COMMENTARY

SALUTATION

James i:i

The salutation of the Letter of James more closely follows the
usual format of a Greek letter of the day ("So-and-so to So-and-so,
greetings") than any other of the New Testament letters. The
word for "servant" really means "slave." Other New Testament
writers employ this strong word about themselves and their atti-
tude toward Christ (see Rom. 1:1; II Peter 1:1; Jude 1; Rev.
1:1). The idea is a prophetic one: God is man's only Lord and
man is his servant (see Num. 11:11; Judges 2:8; Ps. 19:11; Isa.
42 : 1 ) . It is striking that from the earliest times the Christian com-
munity ascribed to Jesus Christ the status of Lord, so giving him
the status of "the Lord" (Yahweh) of the Old Testament (see
Acts 2:36; I Cor. 12:3).

The address, "To the twelve tribes in the dispersion," could
mean that James was writing only to Jews. But if so, he employed
terminology outmoded long before his day, since the twelve tribes
had long since ceased to exist. It is far more likely that, as was the
custom of the Early Church, he adopted the terms of the Old
Covenant to describe the Christian community under the New.

"Greeting" has been the common Greek salutation for centur-
ies. It comes from the stem of a verb meaning to "rejoice" and is
found in a number of related languages, including English. Our
"cheer up" contains the same stem and gives a fairly accurate idea
of the greeting's original meaning.

SALVATION FROM LIFE'S TRIALS AND
TEMPTATIONS

James 1:2-27

The entire "letter," with the exception of its opening verse, may
well be an essay or sermon. Possibly the author first composed it
to serve this end and afterwards added the salutation and sent it
forth to reach a larger audience than that for which it was origi-
nally composed. In any case, there is little in it to suggest that it
was meant to meet a particular situation. It appears rather to be

JAMES 1:2-8 99

an essay on the general subject of "salvation" and the endurance
required to attain it, particularly as the Christian is faced with the
trials and temptations to which he is exposed in a secular culture.
The noun "salvation" does not occur in the letter, though the
verb "to save" is fairly common (1:21; 2:14; 4:12; 5:15, 20).
James thinks of salvation in terms of life or "the crown of life"
( 1 : 12), a figurative manner of speaking foimd also in Revelation
2:10. The two parts of the phrase also appear separately in the
same sense in the New Testament (for "crown" or "wreath" see
I Cor. 9:25; I Peter 5:4; and for "Ufe" see John 1 :4; Acts 1 1 : 18;
Rev. 22 : 1 ) . These terms with the same meaning of salvation also
appear in the contemporary Jewish literature, for example, in the
Dead Sea Scrolls.

Faith — the Means or Way (1:2-8)

The discussion of salvation begins with a brief notice of the
faith upon which its attainment is based (vs. 3). James is quite
realistic in his view of the world in which Christians live. It is a
world full of "various trials" (vs. 2; the Greek word may be
translated "temptations"), and these constitute a genuine "test-
ing" of one's faith (vs. 3). The reader is reminded of Jesus' ex-
perience at this point, and possibly James had it in mind (see
Matt. 4:1-11; Heb. 5:7-10). Both Paul and Hebrews think of
Jesus as passing through obedience and suffering to maturity or
perfection, in which condition he becomes the Savior of men (see
Phil. 2:5-11). Similarly, with James the testing of the Christian's
faith issues in "steadfastness" or stick-to-it-iveness, if it is endured
(vs. 3; see Rom. 5:3-5). This in turn leads to his being "perfect
and complete" (vs. 4; the words mean "mature" in our modem
terminology, see Eph. 4:13; Heb. 6:1), that is, to his arriving at
the goal that God sets for a man's life. That Christians should
"count it all joy" when they are subjected to experiences which so
closely parallel those of their Lord ought to be obvious. No Chris-
tian should expect life to be for him a bed of roses, when his
Lord's was not (see Matt. 5:11-12; Rom. 6:1-4; Col. 1:24-29).

At the heart of Christian experience is a "wisdom" from above
(vs. 5; 3:17) which makes it possible for the believer both to un-
derstand the nature of the gospel and to act in accordance with its
demands. James is later to elaborate this theme (3:13-18). Here it is
his purpose merely to assure his readers that it is God's gift and

100 JAMES 1:9-11

not to be acquired by one's natural effort. The God of the Chris-
tian is One "who gives to all men generously and without re-
proaching." This is in accord with Jesus' teaching (see Matt. 7:
7-11 and Luke 11:9-13).

The one condition on man's part upon which this gift of God
rests is that faith of which James has been speaking (vs. 6). This
again is an echo of Jesus' teaching (Matt. 21:22; Mark 11:24).
It had found expression in his ministry of healing on numerous
occasions (Mark 2:5; 5:34; 10:52; Luke 7:9). The Gospels re-
cord the fact that when the response of faith was not present
Jesus was unable to perform his saving works (Mark 6:5-6).

To make faith rather than works the normative response of man
toward God's revelation represents a Christian recovery of the
prophetic teaching and is not to be found in the Jewish literature
contemporary with the beginnings of the Christian Church. It
represents a major stress of Paul (see Rom. 4; Gal. 3). It was ac-
cepted also in the earliest days of the Church (Acts 3:16; 6:5;
11 :24). The comparison of one who "doubts" to "a wave of the
sea that is driven and tossed by the wind" comes nearest to Paul's
description of the doubter in Ephesians 4:14. The Greek word
translated "double-minded" (vs. 7) is a natural description of a
person characterized by ambivalence, one "unstable in all his
ways."

Salvation (the Crown of Life)— God's Gift (1:9-18)

Not to Be Confused with One's Earthly Lot (1:9-11)

Like the Old Testament prophetic writings, the Christian faith
early had much to say relative to a proper scale of values, and the
Church followed its Master in an earnest endeavor to set men's
minds right at this point. "Treasures on earth" were set over
against "treasures in heaven" (Matt. 6:19-21), the carnal oppo-
site the spuitual (I Cor. 3:1-4; see also Luke 16:19-31). The
"rich man" would find it difficult "to enter the kingdom of God"
(Mark 10:25), and the rich church would hear its Lord say, "I
will spew you out of my mouth" (Rev. 3:16). This is not to say
that the rich man would be condemned for his riches or the poor
man accepted for his poverty. It was a mere matter of fact that
"not many . . . wise according to worldly standards, not many
. . . powerful, not many ... of noble birth" had been chosen by

JAMES 1:12 101

God to become members of Christ's Church (I Cor. 1:26-28).
Outside Palestine, at least, most early Christians had previously
been slaves (I Cor. 7:21-24; 12:13). The present passage and
2:2-7, however, suggest that a rich minority already were to be
found in the Church.

James' present point, however, is that in the Christian brother-
hood such distinctions do not count, for before the Lord of life
they do not (see 2:5). It is true of the Christian who is rich, as
of other rich men, that "like the flower of the grass . . . will the
rich man fade away in the midst of his pursuits" (vss. 10-11).
That "you can't take it with you" is no less applicable to the
Christian than to another.

In the Christian brotherhood a point of view transcending such
monetary distinctions is secured. There is in this fellowship a
leveling process at work which results in "exaltation" for the
"lowly brother," and equally in "humiliation" for "the rich" one.
This teaching is identical with that of Paul (Gal. 3 :28; Col. 3:11).
But it also finds a real affinity with Isaiah 40:6-8, where the tran-
sitory nature of "all flesh" is contrasted with "the word of our
God" which "will stand for ever." The thought of the creative and
powerful "word of truth" is only a few verses away from this pas-
sage in James (vss. 18-21) and may have arisen from the associa-
tion of ideas in the prophetic passage cited. But there are also
parallels between James' teaching here and Jesus' parable of the
Sower (Matt. 13:3-9), for example, "the sun . . . with its scorch-
ing heat," the withering of the grass, and the falling of its flower.

Assured by God's Loving Promise (1:12)

James now returns to the positive attitudes taken up in verses
2-4 with respect to trials or temptations. The comments made on
the former passage apply in general to verse 12 as well.

Two new thoughts which appear to go beyond those in verses
2-4 are: (1) That the maturity spoken of in verse 12 is to be
equated with receiving "the crown of life," that is, the crown
which is life. In the contemporary culture a crown (chaplet, dia-
dem) stood either for authority, as in the case of kings, or for
achievement or victory, as in athletic contests (I Cor. 9:25) and
in the "triumph" given to a returning conqueror. In the latter case,
the crown was roughly the equivalent of a medal of distinction or
an athletic cup with us. It is probably the latter idea that is present
here; life is the crown or medal granted to him who attains matur-

102 JAMES 1:13-18

ity, or, better, it is the maturity itself. (2) That "God has promised"
this crown "to those who love him" is also a new thought in the
letter. Its equivalent elsewhere is to be found only in Revelation
2:10, and there faithfulness rather than love is the condition of
the crown's reception. That God gives promises on this condition
is, however, a biblical idea (Exod. 20:6; Deut. 7:9).

Tempting Due to Covetousness (1:13-15)

It might be argued that, since God is the author of aU things, he
also sends to men experiences of trial, of testing, of temptation
(vss. 2-4). Indeed, God does bring men into a situation of testing
with a view to discerning and even strengthening character. This
is one step in the maturing process. It is one thing, however, to
say that God brings a man into such a situation and quite another
to suggest that the test or trial is in itself the equivalent of the
temptation which may emerge from it. James is here arguing
against the pagan thought that opposites (good and evil) exist
side by side in God.

Like Paul (Rom 7:7-25), James sees the source of a man's
temptations to he in "his own desire" (vs. 14, or "covetousness"),
which, given the testing situation, has "lured" and then "enticed"
him. Man's temptation comes from within, from what he is, not
from without. The scene is set by life's trials; but a man's response
to these — ^that which converts trials into temptations — depends
upon what the man himself is like within.

The sequence following in verse 15 of "desire," "sin," "death"
is also closely related to Paul's thought in Romans 7:8-10. In both
writers "death" is intended to cover every form of disintegration
and final collapse to which man is heir. Death was, indeed, the
opposite of life, and both alike related to every side of a man's
being (see Jer. 21:8).

Gift from God (1:16-18)

Having made it clear that God is not the author of man's temp-
tations, James now turns to the contrary affirmation that God is
the author of his salvation. Verse 16 is a link between the two
thoughts and is a plea to the reader to think straight! God is not
to be charged with man's shortcomings. On the contrary, it is the
"good giving and the suitable gift" (see vs. 17, perhaps a well-
known poetic line), no matter what this may be, that is "from
above." Specifically, our new creation "by the word of truth" (see

JAMES 1:19-27 103

I Peter 1:23; John 1:1-5) is from God, so we become the "first
fruits" of a regenerated universe (Rom. 8:19-23; Rev. 14:4).

In the difficult clause, "with whom there is no variation or
shadow due to change," James is perhaps mentally comparing
God with the sun and other heavenly bodies which do exhibit
changes and cast shadows.

God's Word— the Power (1:19-27)

Condition of Its Reception: Humility (1:19-21)

Having said that "the word of truth" is God's creative agency
in man's redemption, James now goes on to declare what is re-
quired of man by way of response: "Receive with meekness the
implanted word, which is able to save your souls" (vs. 21). But
what is involved in meekness (humility) , and how does it express
itself? It involves being "quick to hear" (a good listener), "slow
to speak" (thoughtful and deliberate), "slow to anger" (not over-
hasty, given to jumping to conclusions), combined with the will-
ingness to go into action when the wrong is shown to be one's own
("put away all filthiness and rank growth of wickedness"). All
such response adds up to "the righteousness of God," that is, that
which he requires of man (Matt. 5:20; 6:33).

Manner of Its Use: Obedience (1:22-25)

Humility can go too far. It can declare that one is worthy only
to sit and listen, but not to act. People who have this attitude de-
ceive themselves (vs. 22). This is like Paul's teaching in Romans
2:13. It was common Jewish teaching in his day. Such self-de-
ceived people (those who practice false humihty) are compared
with the man who takes a quick look at a mirror and goes away,
forgetful of the kind of man he is (the point being, he should have
done something about it!). By contrast, the Christian should look
"into the perfect law, the law of liberty" (that is, "the word of
truth," or the gospel) as his mirror. Seeing himself in its light,
he should not forget what he is like but be "a doer that acts" (vs.
25; see H Cor. 3:18).

Summary of Its Message: Social and Personal Ethics (1:26-27)

But what action is to be taken by the well-intentioned Chris-
tian? And what is to be identified with true reUgious practice?

104 JAMES 2:1-13

Religion must be given some solid content. James' positive defini-
tion is in terms of social and personal ethics. He gives, for the
moment, two examples — "to visit orphans and widows in their
affliction," a deep need to which the Early Church had long re-
sponded (Acts 6); and "to keep oneself unstained from the world,"
a teaching especially important as the Church went out into the
profligacy of the Greco-Roman society of its day (Gal. 1:4; Eph.
2:2).

SALVATION'S EViPLICATIONS FOR SOCIAL AND
PERSONAL LIVING

James 2:1 — 5:6

Inconsistency of Faith with Partiality (2:1-13)

Distinctions Based on Wealth (2:1-4)

That true rehgion, or what James now calls "the faith of our
Lord Jesus Christ," may be defined in terms of its ethical implica-
tions is further iUustrated by a hypothetical case of partiaUty prac-
ticed in the church. The example concerns two men — one rich,
the other poor — ^who attend the "assembly" (literally, "synagogue,"
either gathering, congregation, or house of worship) of the Chris-
tian community. One man wears gold rings and fine clothing, the
other is shabby. The assembled congregation is assumed to be im-
pressed by the magnificence of the one and to treat him with
great deference, while perversely ignoring the other or treating him
with disrespect. One gains the impression that an actual practice
in the church is being described! This seems to follow particularly
from the wording in verse 4, where the Greek may mean, "Do you
not customarily make distinctions among yourselves?"

The description of Jesus Christ as "the Lord of glory" repre-
sents a pinnacle of the Christian teaching regarding his person.
As the Christian's Lord, Jesus is here identified with the "glory"
or manifested presence of God among his people (I Sam. 4:22;
Isa. 6:3; John 1:14).

Argument Against Such Practice (2:5-13)

The first point in a detailed argument against partiality is that
God, if he discriminates at all, does so in favor of the "poor in

JAMES 2:5-13 105

the world" rather than against them! Verse 5 sounds like a curious
blending of the teaching of Jesus (Matt. 5:3; Luke 12:32) with
that of Paul (I Cor. 1:26). (For the end of the verse see the com-
ment on 1:12.)

In verses 6 and 7 it seems that the examples of both rich and
poor are strangers, unknown to the local Christian congregation.
James now advances the argument, therefore, that the rich as a
class have an unsavory reputation in view of their treatment of
Christians (vss. 6-7). And this is true on two counts: (1) they op-
press Christians, dragging them into court (see Acts 4:1-3; 13:50),
and (2) they blaspheme the name of Christ. The rhetorical ques-
tions are intended to lead to the conclusion that the burden of
proof is on the rich stranger to show why he should expect re-
spect at the hands of Christians!

James accepts, as did the whole Church (Matt 22:39; Rom.
13:9-10), the high teaching of Leviticus 19:18, to the effect that
love is the fundamental attitude to be cultivated toward other
persons. He terms this law a "royal" one (vs. 8), no doubt
meaning that it is addressed not to slaves but rather to free men
judged to be sovereign in governing their own hves (1:25; 2:12; I
Peter 2:9).

The final argument against partiality is derived from a concep-
tion of the Law as a unit; so that "whoever keeps the whole law
but fails in one point has become guilty of all of it" (vs. 10). This
is a principle accepted also by Jesus and Paul (Matt. 5:19; Gal.
3:10), as apparently by their Jewish contemporaries. The applica-
tion of the principle to the Law's specific commands was easy
enough to understand (vs. 11). The difficulty lay in observing that
an attitude such as partiality was also to be comprehended under
the Law's jurisdiction; so that anyone exhibiting this attitude com-
mitted sin and was "convicted" as a transgressor (vs. 9). In sug-
gesting that attitudes and motives come under the Law's jurisdic-
tion, James adopts much the position of Jesus in the Sermon on
the Mount (Matt. 5:22, 28, 39). Both apply the principle to love
of neighbor. The law which James would thus place before the
Christian conscience is "the law of liberty" (that is, "the word of
truth," or the gospel — 1:18). This Christian law may be said to
limit its concern to items in which man is free to exercise his
conscience and judgment. It derives no doubt from Jesus' limita-
tion of the Law to the motive of love toward God and neigh-
bor (Matt 22:34-40). The argument relating to partiality is finished

106 JAMES 2:14-26

as it was begun, with a reference to God's attitude (vs. 13). God's
example, of mercy which "triumphs over judgment," is in this, as
in all matters, man's true guide.

Relation of Faith to Works (2:14-26)

The latter part of chapter 2 has been held by some to have
teen written in opposition to Paul's teaching on justification by
grace through faith alone (Rom. 4; Gal. 3). Luther went so far as
to call this "a right strawy epistle." Admittedly, both writers em-
ploy the example of Abraham, apparently to prove opposite points
(vs. 21; Rom. 4:2-25). But on closer examination, it is clear that
they are employing the same terms with different meanings.
"Faith" with Paul is saving faith, intimate attachment to Christ
issuing naturally in fruitage such as he wishes (Rom. 4:19-22;
Gal. 3:14 with 5:22-23); with James "faith" is "faith by itself"
(vs. 17), that is, shallow belief in a proposition, such as "demons"
may have (vs. 19). Similarly, when Paul speaks of "works" in this
connection, he means "works of the law," legal righteousness per-
formed to secure salvation (Gal. 3:2); but James by "works" means
the natural product of true faith — what Paul calls "the fruit of the
Spirit" (Gal. 5:22). In consequence, there can be no real conflict
between Paul and James at this point, though one may have writ-
ten to correct a misunderstanding caused by the writing of the
other.

Futility of Faith without Works (2:14-17)

"Faith but . . . not works" (vs. 14), or "faith by itself" (vs. 17),
is the subject of James' interest in this section and the next. Such
faith is "dead" or futile and therefore cannot be true Christian
faith. Christian faith is a working faith, one that follows through
and gets results. The single illustration at this point is that of the
poor brother or sister in need of food or clothing. To say to such
a one, "Go in peace, be warmed and filled" (vs. 16), is sheer
mockery. It accomplishes nothing. Such faith is obviously dead; it
is equally obviously not Christian. For everything Christian is on
the side of life and produces life and issues in the crown of life.

Faith with and without Works (2:18-26)

The hypothetical opponent who wishes to separate faith and
works, suggesting that a man may have the one without the other.

JAMES 3:1-2 107

may be a Jew, if we may interpret James' words as, "You (a
Christian) have faith and I (a Jew) have works," meaning thereby
that the two faiths may well agree to disagree at this point. In any
case, the reply is to the effect that though his opponent may accept
such a division as valid, the Christian cannot. Anything worthy of
the name of "faith," to the Christian's mind, can never exist
"apart from . . . works." Take by way of example the proposition
that "God is one" (vs. 19). Here is something that might conceiv-
ably be called a "faith apart from . . . works"; for it certainly is
nonproductive. But of what worth is it? "Even the demons" have
such faith! By having it, they invalidate it.

No, says James, faith and works go together and are not to be
separated. Indeed, "I by my works will show you my faith" (vs.
18). To demonstrate this, James takes first the case of Abraham's
wiUingness to offer up Isaac. Here clearly "faith was active along
with his works, and faith was completed by works." Such faith
demonstrated itself in its activity, so much so that one may say
that "a man is justified by works and not by faith alone" (vs. 24).
The same conclusion appears justified in the case of Rahab the
harlot, who assisted the spies at the capture of Jericho (Joshua
2:1-21). Hers surely was a working faith (see also Heb. 11:31).

In conclusion, James calls upon the well-known Hebrew-Chris-
tian teaching that body and spirit cannot be divided one from the
other (vs. 26) ; both are needed to form the unity of man's being.
So, he declares, faith and works must go together; without the one,
the other is dead.

Opposition Between God's Word and Man's Word

(3:1-18)

Man's Need of Controlling His Word (3:1-2)

The Christian's works must measure up at every point. There is
one member of a man's body which has a vastly important part
to play in the activity of "the whole body," namely, his tongue.
So far is this true that "if any one makes no mistakes in what he
says he is a perfect man, able to bridle the whole body also." Con-
trol of the tongue is, in other words, the true mark of maturity in
the Christian. It is only such persons who should undertake to
become teachers, for the teacher is one who is "judged with
greater strictness" regarding what he says.

108 JAMES 3:3-12

Examples of Small Controllers (3:3-4)

The reader is not to look askance at the tongue because it is so
small a member. Size has nothing to do with significance here.
Two comparable examples are offered from other fields of human
interest. These are the bits which are placed in the mouths of
horses (vs. 3), and the very small rudder used in guiding a ship
(vs. 4). In each case, the "whole bodies" of the horses and the
whole ship are properly directed and controlled.

The Tongue — a Small Uncontrolled Controller (3:5-12)

Similarly, "the tongue is a little member" and, if the analogy
held, it should be capable of controlling for good man's whole
body. Instead, there is present here a factor which is absent in
the cases of bits and rudder just cited. This factor, though James
does not here employ the term, is sin. Man can tame everything else
with which he has to do — beast, bird, reptile, sea creature, but not
the tongue; it is "a restless evil, full of deadly poison," "a fire,"
"an unrighteous world among our members." The tongue, instead
of controlling for good, succeeds only in "staining the whole
body." Being itself "set on fire by hell," it kindles the entire "cycle
of nature," the cycle of man's whole existence from morning to
night.

James is particularly impressed by the tongue's double-dealing,
its "blessing and cursing" at the same time, the blessing being for
God, the cursing for men.

The implication of the passage is that the same attitude of re-
spect and love must be maintained both for God and for "men,
who are made in the likeness of God." This is the equivalent of
Jesus' teaching relative to the only two necessary commandments;
the command to love one's fellow men is placed on a par with
loving God (Mark 12:31-33). Throughout this section, moreover,
there are subtle reminiscences of the Sermon on the Mount. The
question emerges here, therefore, as to whether James may not
have had available the teaching of Jesus in some oral-tradition
form. Obviously, he is not merely quoting from one of our canoni-
cal Gospels.

The phrase "the Lord and Father" in verse 9 has no exact
equivalent in Scripture. The nearest to it is perhaps Paul's favor-
ite phrase, "the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ" (Rom.
15:6; II Cor. 1:3; Eph. 1:3).

JAMES 3:13-18 109

Wisdom from Above (3:13-18)

Like the Old Testament and apocryphal "wisdom literature,"
James now traces both the tongue, and the word which it utters,
back to two possible sources, to each of which he gives the gen-
eral name of "wisdom." One of these sources is "the wisdom from
above," the other in origin and nature is "earthly, unspiritual,
devihsh." James has already shown that the first of these is not
natural to man but is to be acquired only from "God, who gives
to all men generously and without reproaching" (1:5). Obviously,
then, to James' mind such wisdom is to be identified with God's
word, "the word of truth" (1:18), which we have seen to be the
mediating cause of man's salvation (1:21). This divine wisdom
James describes in remarkable fashion in terms of its effects — it
is "first pure, then peaceable, gentle, open to reason, full of mercy
and good fruits, without uncertainty or insincerity" (vs. 17), a de-
scription obviously motivated by James' endeavor to paint in vivid
colors a picture contrasting sharply with what passes for wisdom
among false teachers. The true teacher, infused with this divine
wisdom, will "show his works in the meekness of wisdom," that
is, in a sort of divinely instilled humility which will never prove
"false to the truth" which he professes.

By contrast, the opposite kind of wisdom — which, since James
feels impelled to write about it, must have already appeared in the
Christian community — springs out of man's selfish nature. It mani-
fests itself in "jealousy and selfish ambition" (vss. 14, 16), not in
the wish to set forth God's truth but rather in an attempt to ac^
quire a sort of personal comer on truth. In the end, this results in
a man's being actually "false to the truth," as he boasts of his own
relation to it. Among such teachers the net product is naturally
"disorder and every vile practice." This section on the conflict be-
tween the two words is closed with what again sounds like a refer-
ence to the oral tradition of Jesus' teachings — "the harvest of right-
eousness is sown in peace by those who make peace" (vs. 18; see
Matt. 5:9-10). That is to say, the righteousness which God expects
of man is achieved only by those who exercise the divine wisdom
in humility and peace, never by those who exalt their own wisdom
and so achieve nothing but disorder.

110 JAMES 4:1-10

Opposition Between Passion and Humility (4:1 — ^5:6)

Friendship with the World (4:1-4)

The contrast between the two kinds of wisdom which James has
drawn in the above section, he now discusses on the emotional
level. The causes of wars and fightings in which the natural man
apart from God — ^what he calls "the world" (vs. 4) — indulges are
man's own "passions." These are the natural impulses which arise
in man's "members" (that is, within the structure of his person),
and which are actually "at war" within him. Like Paul, who speaks
of "the law of sin which dwells in . . . [one's] members" (Rom.
7:23) and of the consequent conflict between "flesh" and "mind"
that ensues (Rom. 7:25), James believes that the natural man or
"the world" apart from God's grace is in an ambivalent condition
from which he cannot of himself escape.

James' description of this hopeless state of "the world" is ex-
ceedingly graphic — "you desire and do not have," "you kill";
"you covet and cannot obtain," "you fight and wage war"; "you
ask and do not receive" (a casual reference perhaps to Jesus'
teaching as in Matt. 7:7, but in reverse) "because you ask wrongly."
"Unfaithful creatures" in the Greek is "adulteresses" — a descrip-
tion of those who practice "friendship with the world" and one
first given them by the Hebrew prophets (Hosea 3:1). And as with
those prophets, James sees no compromise at this point: "friend-
ship with the world is enmity with God" (see Matt. 6:24).

Friendship with God (4:5-10)

There is, however, a different emotional attitude which brings
real joy and peace to the human heart, the attitude of the man
who does not insist on his own desires but rather submits to God,
draws near to God, humbles himself before the Lord. This, too, is
akin to Paul's teaching to the effect that men must "yield . . .
[themselves] to God . . . and . . . [their] members to God as in-
struments of righteousness" (Rom. 6:13), and both teachings are
akin to that of Jesus (Matt. 6:33). It is only out of such genuine
humihty before the Lord that a sense of exaltation arises (vs. 10;
see Luke 14:11).

This is always true of man's experience, because fundamentally
he is dealing with a God who "yearns jealously over the spirit
which he has made to dwell in us" (vs. 5; Exod. 20:5). God desires

JAMES 4:11-17 111

fellowship with man but on his own terms, and these terms are
well expressed in Proverbs 3:34 which James quotes: "God op-
poses the proud, but gives grace to the humble" (vs. 6; see Luke
18:9-14). In verses 7-9 James gives us, in what amounts to "blank
verse," his concise formula for achieving this fellowship with God
and its consequent rich reward (compare Ps. 24:4; Matt. 5:4, 8).
Much of this passage has the ring of Jesus' teaching, and, like the
Sermon on the Mount, it exhibits the Hebrew poetic form of
paralleUsm.

Judgment of Others (4:11-12)

James has already written against the practice, observable in
the Church, of making distinctions between brothers on the basis
of wealth (2:2-4). He now speaks out, and with great vigor, against
speaking evil against and judging a brother at all. We are strongly
reminded of Jesus' teaching on this subject (Matt. 7:1-5). The ar-
gument against such practice is carried to its logical conclusion —
that when one disobeys the law relating to love of brothers one is
actually calling in question the vaUdity of the law itself, one so to
speak "judges the law," setting himself above it But God alone is
both "lawgiver and judge."

Boasting (4:13-17)

In this and the following sections James returns to the arrogant
rich (see 2:6-7), first to condemn their arrogance and then to pro-
claim their evil end. The actions of the rich are described in much
the same manner adopted by Jesus in the parable of the Rich Fool
(Luke 12: 16-21 ). In both, the rich man is made to appear totally
oblivious to the evanescent aspect of life and riches. He speaks
within his heart and acts accordingly, as though life were to run
on indefinitely, instead of being "a mist that appears for a little
time and then vanishes" (vs. 14; see Ps. 90:5-6). This is the atti-
tude of the practical materialist, whatever his protestations of reU-
gion may be. His boastful arrogance (vs. 1 6) for aU practical pur-
poses disregards the existence of the Lord of life in whose hands
are all its issues (vs. 15).

The clause "If the Lord wiUs" (vs. 15), followed by some de-
duction based on this premise, is one commonly employed among
both pious Jews and Moslems to this day. Its use represents the
speaker's wish to indicate at every possible opportunity his sense
of dependence on the divine mercy and no doubt may, contrary

112 JAMES 5:1-6

to James' intention, become merely a stereotyped formula iadica-
tive of a legalistic religion.

Worldly Riches (5:1-6)

The statement that the rich "have killed the righteous man" (vs.
6), taken Uterally, shows that in this passage, at any rate, James
cannot be thinking of Christians. Doubtless he has in mind here
the unconverted rich man (Jew or pagan) about whom he has al-
ready written (2:6-7), although that there were rich persons in the
Christian community at the time of this writiog has already been
indicated (1:10; 2:2). Other features in the description of these
rich also indicate outsiders, reflecting the preaching of both He-
brew prophets and Jesus. It had been a point of great importance
in the Mosaic Law that "the wages of a hired servant" should be
paid him at the end of each day's labor (Lev. 19:13). This was of
no little practical necessity in a day when such laborers "lived
from hand to mouth"; if a man's wages were kept back at the end
of the day, he and his family did not eat (Deut 24:14-15; Mai.
3:5; Matt. 10:10). It may be such a practice that James has in
mind in verse 4. Then, too, the general attitude of these rich to-
ward their rich garments, their gold and silver, their luxury and
pleasure, suggests that they are practical materialists who have not
learned the Christian attitude toward worldly values. Two out-
standing characteristics of this teaching should be noted: First, it
reflects quite clearly Jesus' teaching relative to "treasures on
earth" and "treasures in heaven" (Matt. 6: 19-21). The references
to moth and rust as corrupting forces are significantly repeated in
James (vss. 2-3), as though he were acquainted with the oral tradi-
tion of Jesus' teaching current at the time. The idea that rust will
eat the rich man's "flesh" (that is, his person) as well as his silver
and gold is akin to Paul's teaching about the body in I Corinthians
6:12-13. In all three — Jesus, Paul, and James — ^it is what a man's
attachment to material values and pleasures does to his person
(body, flesh) that is of deep concern. Second, James' teaching re-
flects the Early Church's awareness of the Last Judgment and of
living in the end of time (see especially vss. 1, 3, 5; compare Heb.
1:2; I Peter 1:5; I John 2:18).

JAMES 5:7-12 113

SALVATION IN THE LIGHT OF ETERNITY

James 5:7-20

Endurance Until the Lord's Coming (5:7-11)

This closing section of the letter focuses attention upon the
eternal order. James has already written of the "one lawgiver and
judge" of men (4:12). That one is now identified with the Lord
who is about to come again. His coming is at hand; as Judge he
"is standing at the doors" (vs. 9; see Matt 24:33; Rev. 3:20).
This idea of the nearness of the Lord's coming was a general be-
lief of the Early Church (for example, see Phil. 4:5; I Thess. 4:15;
I Peter 4:7; I John 2:18).

No doubt there were those in the Church who accepted such
teaching in most hteral fashion; indeed, there is some evidence to
show that this was the case. Paul appears to have written I Thes-
salonians 5:1-11 in order to counsel the Church that nothing
definite could be known about the matter of "times" and "sea-
sons." Second Peter 3:8-10 suggests that, as Psalm 90:4 teaches,
God's ways of reckoning time are not man's. The thought in both
these passages would suggest that the prophetic minds in the
Church interpreted any reference to time in the most general
sense. Man must always be ready and waiting for the Lord of
life. So also for James, man must, like the farmer, "be patient";
like the prophets and Job he must be "steadfast," ready to ex-
emplify the same "suffering and patience" as they; and this in
view of the fact that the Lord of life who is man's Judge is "com-
passionate and merciful" and will judge men accordingly when he
comes.

Oaths and the Judgment (5:12)

The taking of an oath during ordinary conversation was a long-
standing custom within the Hebrew- Jewish tradition, as it is in the
Moslem world today. The idea was that one was converted from
being a liar into a truth-teller by simply taking an oath by whatever
one held sacred. James follows his Lord in teaching that truth is
to be respected for its own sake, that "a man's word should be
as good as his bond," his "yes be yes," his "no be no" (see Matt.

114 JAMES 5:13-18

5:33-37). AH this, again, is to be seen in the light of eternity, of
the final Judgment, of God's "condemnation."

Prayer and Healing (5:13-18)

There was to James' mind, as to that of the Early Church gen-
erally, a very thin line of demarcation between history and eter-
nity; the second could at any moment break upon the first. No-
where is this seen more clearly than in the matter of sickness and
health; both are to be taken before God — the one in petition, the
other in praise. Verse 13 sounds like an intentional couplet in
blank verse, thus:

Is any among you ill? let him pray.
Is any well? let him sing.

The verb translated "is . . . iU" above is the equivalent of the noun
"suffering" in verse 10. It has a wide usage, but in verse 14 James
clearly defines the "suffering" he means here as "sickness." In
such a case, James suggests that "the elders of the church" be
called in, that they may do two things: pray over the sick one, and
anoint him with oU "in the name of the Lord." It was standard
procedure in the Jewish community thus to combine prayer with
anointing with oil. Wine was also used along with oil for me-
dicinal purposes among the Jews (Luke 10:29-37). Such prayer
by the elders is a special case of what is generally termed "inter-
cessory prayer" today. Such prayer for others is based on the fact
of the corporate nature of human life — a principle recognized
everywhere throughout Scripture. As God deals with men in all
matters on both an individual and a corporate level, there ap-
pears to be no reason why prayer should be an exception to this
rule. It is clear from the phrases employed ("in the name of the
Lord," "the prayer of faith," and "the Lord will raise him up")
that James attributed the actual healing, not to the oil, but to the
Lord. In Hebrew thought a man's person was a unit and both
good and evil impinged upon that person as a whole, if at aU. The
righteous man whose "prayer . . . has great power in its effects"
is the man committed to God's will, who prays for what his Lord
wills and whose prayer is in consequence answered (Matt. 6:9-13;
Mark 11:24-25; Rom. 8:26-27).

JAMES 5:19-20 115

Conversion of the Sinner (5:19-20)

The last short section contains a further elaboration of the prin-
ciple of corporate living already stated in verse 16. This is personal
evangelism directed toward one in the Christian community who
"wanders from the truth" of the gospel (1:18, 21-22). The soul
saved from death in verse 20 is undoubtedly that of the sinner,
not that of the evangelist; and if so, the "multitude of sins" thereby
covered wiU surely also refer to those of the sinner. "Cover" is a
Hebraism meaning "overtook," "forgive" (Ps. 32:1). First Peter
4:8 contains much the same thought. James' interest here and in
the preceding section centers at all times in the sinner or the un-
healthy person involved. His intense desire is to further personal
evangelism, with a view to that sinner's conversion and restoration
to Christian living.

THE FIRST LETTER OF

PETER

INTRODUCTION

Historical and Literary Problems

Authorship

There has been considerable doubt on the part of numerous
New Testament interpreters concerning the identity of the author
of the letter. This doubt has been strengthened by a study of the
contents of First Peter itself. The Greek of the letter is of high
quality, even classical in its expression at times. Its style, syntax,
and extensive vocabulary (63 Greek words not found elsewhere
in the New Testament) are those of a writer who used the Greek
language with fluency and ease. Accordingly, the question arises
whether a Galilean fisherman could have been the author of such
a work. Admittedly, Galilee was a bilingual or even trilingual
district to an extent, and Greek loan words have been found in
the Palestinian Aramaic of the period. But this is far from saying
that a Galilean fisherman could have written the smooth Greek
of First Peter.

A further objection to the Petrine authorship occurs in connec-
tion with 4:16: "If one suffers as a Christian, let him not be
ashamed, but under that name let him glorify God." This lan-
guage, it is held by some, refers to the official Roman persecutions.
Unofficial persecution, however, had always been a possibility with
which the follower of Jesus had to reckon. To suffer under the name
of "Christian" was possible at least as early as Acts 11 :26; it be-
came the actual experience of Paul and his associates. It is by no
means clear that the readers of First Peter were suffering from an
ofl&cial persecution conducted by the state, rather than from the
sort of occasional "hostility" such as was often stirred up against
Christians by both Jewish and Gentile enemies (see Acts 5:41;
9:16; 15:26; Phil. 1:29).

On the other hand, as has frequently been pointed out, there

FIRST peter: introduction

117

ox

V i

are numerous subtle indications in First Peter that serve to identify
its author with the Apostle of that name. First, although he gener- q^^^ JJ^
ally quotes (with a fair degree of accuracy) from the Greek Old
Testament (rather than from the Hebrew), this is merely what
we should expect of one writing to churches in the Roman Empire
whose Old Testament would ordinarily be the ancient Greek trans-
lation. What strikes one as most important in his quotations is the
independence of the author's judgment in his selections and the
insight which he shows into the possible Christian use of Old Tes-
tament passages not otherwise quoted in the New Testament (com-
pare, for example, 1:16 with Lev. 11:44-45 and 19:2; 2:24-25
with Isa. 53:5-6; 3:14-15 with Isa. 8:12-13; 4:18 with Prov.
11:31; 5:7 with Ps. 55:22). In a number of these and like pas-
sages he is not so much consciously quoting as merely articulating
his thought with the language of the Old Testament, thereby in-
dicating that he had deeply steeped himself in those Scriptures.
Second, the author's reference to himself as "a witness of the suf-
feiings of Christ" (5:1) reflects the attitudes of an early period,
when the Cross and Resurrection were the important themes of
the Church's preaching rather than the events of Jesus' life and
ministry (see Acts 2:22-36). Third, the injunction to "tend the
flock of God" (5:2) may be a recollection of John 21:15-17, and
similarly "clothe yourselves . . . with humiUty" (5:5) is possibly
an allusion to John 13:4-5. Finally, there are numerous similarities
between the teachings of the letter and those of Peter in the Book
of Acts (see comment).

The problem of authorship is greatly relieved if we assume that
"SUvanus" (5:12) was more than a mere messenger by whom Peter
sent the letter to the churches addressed. In saying that "by Sil-
vanus" he had "written briefly" to these churches, "exhorting and
declaring that this is the true grace of God," Peter may wish to
declare his colleague as coauthor of the letter. It had been Paul's
custom to indicate coauthorship at the beginning of his letters, and
in fact he had thus associated Silvanus with himself in the writing
of First and Second Thessalonians (see 1 : 1 in each case). This Sil-
vanus is in all probabiUty the "Silas" of Acts (see comment on
5:12). And if so, he was a man of considerable stature in the
Christian community (Acts 15:22-40), and one who was of great
assistance to Paul, who was, like himself, both a Roman citizen
(Acts 16:37) and a man of culture who could deal with the intel-
ligentsia (17:4).

:wi-fl(Jtk

'}<,

~W^

'1^^

118 FIRST peter: introduction

This theory of coauthorship, particularly if it be assumed that
Peter merely gave Silvanus a somewhat general briefing on
what he wished to write and then allowed him considerable free-
dom both in the matter of particular ideas to be included and the
general structure of the letter, would perhaps account for several
other phenomena which are to be noted. These are: first, the nu-
merous similarities in vocabulary and style between First Peter on
the one hand, and First and Second Thessalonians on the other,
second, Peter's comprehensive injunction that Christians are to
"be subject for the Lord's sake to every human institution" (2:13),
as well as his further elaboration of this idea in connection with
the honoring of "the emperor" in 2:13, 17 (Silvanus and Paul as
Roman citizens would naturally be sensitive on this point in a way
that the Galilean disciples would not); third, Silvanus' wide famil-
iarity with both the Jewish and Greek cultures which prompted
the Jerusalem church to appoint him as one of its two delegates
to handle the delicate situation which had arisen in the church at
Syrian Antioch (Acts 15:22, 27, 32-33) and which would admir-
ably account for the many similarities to be noted between First
Peter and Hebrews. These similarities reflect a wide knowledge
of Christian doctrine and also of contemporary Jewish teach-
ing. Although it is probable that the letter represents the joint
labors of Peter and Silvanus, throughout the comment the author
will be designated as "Peter" and singular pronouns will be em-
ployed.

Readers of the Letter and the Grcumstances Involved

The readers are termed "exiles of the Dispersion in Pontus,
Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia" (1:1). The phrase "ex-
iles of the Dispersion" relates, not to Jews, but rather to Christians
generally (see comment on 1:1). Moreover, if we may assume that
Silvanus joined Peter as coauthor, then there is no reason why the
territory indicated should not include both Paul's field of labor
and that of his colleague, Peter, since Silvanus labored with Paul
throughout this area (Acts 15:40 — 18:5). Indeed, there is no as-
surance that Peter himself had preached to any great extent
among the churches addressed (see I Peter 1:12). The Roman
provinces named include practically the whole of Asia Minor, in
any case the whole of the region lying north and west of the Tau-
rus Mountains.

The order of the names suggests that the coauthors began with

FIRST peter: introduction 119

the provinces to the north and east, and then worked around clock-
wise in a circle to the more cultured and central ones to the west,
and thus included the whole of Asia Minor.

Throughout the region specified there was a great mixture of
races and cultures, including the old native peoples, as well as cul-
tured Greeks and Orientals who, together with many Jews, had
"infiltrated" the populous cities and towns. It was a region seeth-
ing with heterogeneous elements, culturally, religiously, socially,
and poUtically. Into this maelstrom of cultural elements came the
Christian Church, brought there by those "who preached the good
news" to all and sundry (1:12). It is quite likely that, as in other
places in the Roman Empire, the Christian communities thus es-
tablished were made up of all elements of the population, includ-
ing Jews and Gentiles. That these Christian communities had been
established not long before appears from the fact that the authors
speak of them as "Uke newborn babes" and commend to them "the
pure spiritual milk" which will lead them to "grow up to salvation."
They were, however, already suffering persecution for their faith
(1:6; 3:13-17; 4:12-19). Many Christians in the early period were
actually slaves, and it is quite likely that the trials indicated were
of a type such as Christian slaves might expect from pagan mas-
ters (see 2:18-23).

Date and Place of Writing

Those who believe that this letter contains distinct reference to
a persecution conducted in the name of the Roman state, generally
incline to the beUef that it was written (1) about a.d. 67 and
shortly after the Neronian persecution; or (2) if it be held that
Peter was not the author, then during the Domitian persecution
of A.D. 95; or (3) even at the time of the persecution under Tra-
jan in A.D. 111-112. If, however, we accept the Peter-Silvanus au-
thorship of the letter, we must settle on a date sometime be-
fore Peter's death in the late 60's. As it is generally agreed that
Peter employed Paul's Letter to the Romans (a.d. 56-58) and
other of the PauUne letters, the date is brought within the narrow
compass of some ten years. If further it is agreed that First Peter
was acquainted with Hebrews (whose date we have placed at a.d.
65 or 66), then the extreme limits for the date of the letter are
restricted between a.d. 66 and 70. The year a.d. 67 meets all the
requirements.

It is rather generally agreed that the reference in 5:13 to the

120 FIRST peter: introduction

one "at Babylon" is to the church at Rome, and, in consequence,
that the letter was written from the capital city.

The Message and Composition of the Letter

First Peter is directed to new converts (2:2), encouraging them
to achieve the purification or sanctification which is demonstrated
by the putting away of "the passions of the flesh," a course which
the Christian community approved as "good conduct among the
Gentiles" (2:11-12). It is likely that it incorporates a manual of
catechetical instruction for such new converts ( 1 : 3 — 4 : 1 1 ) , either
prepared by the Church and adopted by the coauthors of the letter
or else prepared by them and others for this purpose. The ele-
ments of this catechetical manual as presented in First Peter show
many similarities to elements in First and Second Thessalonians
and other PauUne letters, as well as in James. It is further sug-
gested that two hymns have been incorporated into this cate-
chetical manual, one at 2:4-10 and the other at 3:18-22 (see also
I Tim. 3:16).

Assuming that readers have experienced the new birth at bap-
tism and wiU acknowledge the power which is now at work
within them, the authors arrange most of their materials in the
form of an exhortation, presenting the doctrine of sanctification
in a highly developed form. Such sanctification, they say, is the
content of the good news, the "living hope" of "an inheritance
which is imperishable, undefiled, and unfading" (1:3-4, 12). The
holy life to which such sanctification naturally leads is one pat-
terned after the nature of God (1:13-17) and is generated in the
Christian by "the living and abiding word of God" (1:22-25).
This holy life is incarnated in the Church or Christian commun-
ity (2:4-10) and exhibits a kind of "good conduct" among the
Gentiles which cannot be overlooked by them (2:11-12), as it
issues in right social relationships in every direction (2:13 —
3:12). Furthermore, this sanctified living can withstand the fires
of persecution, for it begins with making Christ the sole Lord of
one's Ufe (3:13-17) and therefore is prepared to share his suf-
ferings and glory (3:18 — 4:19).

Both Hebrews and First Peter were written by authors who for
the moment at least were concerned to state the Christian doctrine
of salvation against the background of cultic worship. Both speak
of purification or sanctification, atoning sacrifice, priesthood, and

FIRST peter: outline 121

"a spiritual house" for the true worship of God in which "spiritual
sacrifices acceptable" to him may be offered. These many simi-
larities between the two letters by no means require that we sup-
pose their authors to have collaborated. They do, however, sug-
gest a common interest and even possibly the use of one letter by
the other writer.

OUTLINE

Salutation. I Peter 1:1-2

The Gospel and Sanctification. I Peter 1:3 — 5:11

The Gospel of an Incorruptible Heritage (1:3-12)
The Sanctification the Gospel Requires (1:13 — 2:10)
Behavior Reflecting the Sanctified Life (2:11 — 3:12)
Sanctification Under Fire : Persecution for Righteousness' Sake
(3:13—5:11)

Closing Greetings. I Peter 5:12-14

122 FIRST PETER 1:1-2

COMMENTARY

SALUTATION
I Peter 1:1-2

In its salutation, the First Letter of Peter follows with some al-
terations the usual form of a Greek letter of the day. The usual
form was, "So-and-so to So-and-so, greetings." Paul had adopted
this pattern but added certain phrases by way of description of
himself as the writer and of the church addressed. These addi-
tions in some cases were quite extensive (see Rom. 1:1-7; I Cor.
1:1-3; Gal. 1:1-5). It had become Paul's habit to include, par-
ticularly in his description of the church addressed, certain items
which suggested the content of the letter to follow. Paul had also
expanded the usual term, "Greetings," into a benediction, thereby
giving it a distinctively Christian flavor. It seems certain that the
salutation of First Peter is definitely patterned after that em-
ployed by Paul.

The writer describes himself as "Peter, an apostle of Jesus
Christ." There can be no doubt that the original disciple of Jesus
of that name is intended. His Aramaic name was originally Simon
Bar-Jona, but Jesus renamed him "Rock" (in Aramaic Kepha, in
Greek Petros; see Matt. 16:17-18; John 1:41-42). It would be
natural of course for Peter, in addressing churches in the Greek-
speaking world, to employ his Greek name. The designation of
himself as "an apostle of Jesus Christ" indicates the authority by
which he writes.

The Christians or churches addressed are described by the
author as the elect ("chosen") "exiles of the Dispersion in Pontus,
Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia" (vs. 1). The adjective
"elect" or "chosen" is a New Testament description of Chris-
tians generally (Titus 1:1; see Eph. 1:4). The term was applied
in the Old Testament to the Chosen People (see Ps. 105:6, 43;
Isa. 45:4). "Exiles" (or "sojourners") is a term which lays stress
upon the transitoriness of one's existence in a particular locality.
It is intended to express the same thought as that in Hebrews 1 1 :
8-16 relative to Abraham and his descendants during their dwell-
ing in the land of Canaan. This was merely a transitory ex-
istence, inasmuch as Abraham looked for the eternal city which

FIRST PETER 1:1-2 123

God had prepared for him. In consequence he and his de-
scendants thought of themselves as "strangers and exiles on the
earth" (Heb. 11:13). "Dispersion" originally indicated the Jews
living outside Palestine (John 7:35; see also James 1:1). James
and Peter in applying this term to the Christian Church were
merely following the common custom of adopting terminology
which originally referred to Israel and Judaism and of refurbish-
ing it for Christian ends. The churches addressed probably include
those to be found throughout Asia Minor north of the Taurus
Mountains (see Introduction).

Verse 2 provides us with a good example — of which there are a
number in the Epistles (II Cor. 13:14; Eph. 4:4-6) — of the type of
passage out of which the later Trinitarian formula of the Church
arose. "Destined by God the Father" is literally in the Greek, "ac-
cording to the foreknowledge of God the Father." However, the
participle "destined" gives the sense of the Semitic idiom lying be-
hind the Greek; for in the Hebrew "to foreknow" often meant
"to determine," "to decide," or "to predestine" (Amos 3:2; and
see Rom. 8:29; 11:2). "SanctiJSed by the Spirit" is a phrase
suggestive of the central teaching of the letter as a whole, which
is to the effect that the Christian way is one of holiness or sancti-
fication like to that of God (1:15-16). The work of both the
Father and the Spirit is said to be for the purpose of the readers'
"obedience to Jesus Christ" and their "sprinkling with his blood."
These phrases also suggest major themes of the letter. In verse
14 obedience is set in contrast to "the passions of your former
ignorance," and in verse 22 this obedience is further related to the
subject of purification or sanctification and is defined as "obedi-
ence to the truth." Sprinkling with blood is a phrase suggestive of
the worship in Tabernacle and Temple. Like the Letter to the
Hebrews, the thought of First Peter moves in a circle of ideas
suggested by that worship (see vs. 19 and Heb. 9:13, 19, 21; 10:
22, 29; 12:24).

At this point in the usual salutation of a Greek letter it was
customary merely to express "greetings" (see James 1:1). Paul
had baptized this usual salutation by employing another form of
the same Greek word-stem, the noun "grace," referring to the
unmerited love of God conferred upon the sinner in the work of
Jesus Christ. With this noun Paul had also habitually joined the
Greek term for "peace" — the translation of the Hebrew word
which was also used as a greeting. This "peace" is understood as

124 FIRST PETER 1:3-5

that between God and man, achieved by Gcxi's redemptive activ-
ity on man's behalf (Isa. 57:19; Eph. 2:14, 17). Peter was ob-
viously acquainted with Paul's custom and simply took over his
formula.

THE GOSPEL AND SANCTIFICATION

I Peter 1:3 — ^5:11
The Gospel of an Incorruptible Heritage (1:3-12)

Its Assurance Resting on God's Mercy and Power (1:3-5)

At this point in his letters it was customary for Paul to insert
a prayer of thanksgiving (see Rom. 1:8; I Cor. 1:4). However,
he altered this formula in two directions: in Galatians 1:6 he
inserted an anathema directed against those who had quickly de-
parted from the "grace of Christ"; and in II Corinthians 1:3 he
substituted a doxology for the usual thanksgiving (see also Eph.
1:3). First Peter, it will be observed, follows the latter pattern,
resembling Ephesians more than Second Corinthians. The literary
style is that known in Greek hterature as a "period" — that is, a
long involved and exceedingly complex sentence, highly orna-
mented with descriptive phrases and subordinate clauses, intended
to supply beauty of syntactical structure worthy of a highly com-
plex theme.

It is rather generally held that the major portion of the letter
(1:3 — 4:11) follows the catechetical or baptismal formula of
instruction given to new converts to the Christian faith in the
Early Church (see Introduction). Following the usual pattern of
this formula, the present section (vss. 3-12), in the form of a
doxology, presents us with a somewhat comprehensive doctrinal
statement. The theme of this doctrinal statement is "the good
news" or gospel (vs. 12) of "an inheritance which is imperishable,
undefiled, and unfading, kept in heaven for you" (vs. 4) . Or again,
it is the good news of "a living hope through the resurrection of
Jesus Christ from the dead" (vs. 3 ) . Finally, it may be defined as
the good news of "a salvation ready to be revealed in the last
time" (vs. 5). As will be seen, aU of these descriptions of the con-
tent of the gospel are oriented toward the future, even toward the
eternal order at the end of history.

FIRST PETER 1:6-9 125

The "living hope" to which Peter makes reference is doubtless
the same as the "hope of eternal Ufe" in Titus 1 : 2. As in all New
Testament thought, such hope of life comes to the Christian
"through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead" (vs. 3;
I Cor. 15:12, 13, 21; and see also Acts 23 : 6; 24:15; Heb. 6:18-
20) . Peter, accordingly, like the other writers of the Early Church,
makes the resurrection of Jesus Christ the cornerstone of the
Christian faith. And as with Paul, who witnesses to the tradition
of the Church from the beginning (I Cor. 15:1-11), the resur-
rection of Christ is a matter of experience to which Peter testifies,
not an abstraction to be proved by logic. The suggestion that "we
have been bom anew" to this hope of life approaches most nearly
to the thought and terminology of the Gospel of John (see John
3:3, 7). Behind the experience, including the resurrection of
Christ himself and our birth to this "Uving hope," hes the "great
mercy" of "the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ." From
the beginning the Church believed that it was the Father who had
raised Jesus Christ from the dead (Acts 2:24, 32; I Cor. 15:15).

Peter speaks of this hope of life as "an inheritance" (vs. 4),
a word taken over from the Old Testament promise with regard
to Canaan (Gen. 17:8) and employed in the New Testament to
refer to the fulfillment of all the promises of God (Acts 20:32;
Gal. 3:18; Eph. 1:14, 18; 5:5; Heb. 9:15). The adjectives "im^
perishable," "undefiled," and "unfading" applied to this "inheri-
tance" enhance the idea of its eternal value; together they are the
equivalent of the expression that it is "kept in heaven" for the
Christian. But if the "mercy" of God is behind the Christian's
eternal hope, it is God's "power" which guarantees the safe-
guarding of both the Christian and his inheritance (vs. 5). "Sal-
vation" is the third of the trilogy of words ("hope," "inheritance,"
"salvation") which together represent the redemption to be re-
ceived by the Christian. This salvation is not in its entirety a
present possession; the believer is "guarded through faith" for its
final reception. And yet for Peter "the last time" has already ar-
rived, as in verse 20 he commits himself to the idea that Christ
has already been "made manifest at the end of the times" (see
also 4:7).

Trial of Our Faith in It (i:6^)

In the previous section Peter remarks that "faith" is the re-
sponse which man must make to the salvation proffered by God

126 FIRST PETER 1:6-9

(vs. 5). The present passage analyzes the circumstances under
which the Christian must express this response of faith, the cir-
cumstances of a realistic world in which the Christian is called
upon "to suffer various trials" (vs. 6). These "trials" are very
real and are calculated to test "the genuineness of . . . faith," even
as "gold ... is tested by fire" (vs. 7). There is no indication that
the "trials" intended are of any special severity; indeed, Peter
suggests in verse 6 that they are only a possibility with which the
Christian has to reckon. In any case "various trials" are a com-
monplace in Christian experience, as is also the paradox that in
the midst of trial and tribulation Christians may "rejoice."

The Christian's joy is the product of his realization of the
"salvation" which he has already begun to experience and to
whose consummation he looks forward (vss. 3-5). Jesus had long
since comforted his disciples with the thought that joy in the
midst of persecution was not only possible for the Christian but
also placed him in the category of the prophets of old time who
had had a similar experience (Matt. 5:11-12). Paul had testi-
fied to his having experienced joy in the midst of suffering (Col.
1:24; see also Rom. 5:3-5; II Cor. 6:10). Moreover, the "little
while" (vs. 6) reminds us of the similar teaching in Hebrews 10:
32-39 and 12:3-11.

It is a psychologically well-authenticated fact, and one attested
by Christian experience, that joy may thus be experienced in
the midst of suffering, provided the sufferer realizes at the time
the larger goal to be attained as the product of the suffering. In
the present instance this goal is stated to be both proximate and
more remote. The proximate or near goal is the testing of "the
genuineness" of the "faith" of Peter's readers (vs. 7); the remote
object of this testing is that these Christians' faith "may redound
to praise and glory and honor at the revelation of Jesus Christ."
Probably "praise and glory and honor" here refer to one thing,
namely, Christ's pleasure at and acceptance of the believer's faith
as the sole condition of his salvation. The event intended in the
expression "the revelation of Jesus Christ" is, of course, the final
coming and the Judgment at the end of the age.

Peter now dwells on the paradoxical nature of his readers' faith
in Christ (vss. 8-9). They have never "seen him," and yet they
"love him," and though they "do not now see him," they "be-
lieve in him and rejoice with unutterable and exalted joy." Such
is the paradoxical nature of the love and faith of Christians at all

FIRST PETER 1:10-12 127

times. For they are called upon to live in a world of nature which
is apprehended by the five senses. And yet it is both their duty
and their privilege to employ the sixth sense of "faith" in appre-
hending him who is invisible (see John 20:29; I Cor. 13: 12; Heb.
11:27). The outcome of such faith is now said to be "the salva-
tion of your souls" (vs. 9), which is the practical equivalent of
the "praise and glory and honor" which we have already noted
(vs. 7).

This Gospel Prophesied of Old (1:10-12)

Peter brings the long Greek "period" to a close with a com-
prehensive reference to the Hebrew prophets' knowledge of and
witness to the Christian's salvation. They "inquired," he says, with
regard to the nature of the "salvation" itself, the "person" by
whom it was to be achieved, and the "time" when this would oc-
cur (vss. 10-11). He remarks almost incidentally that such sal-
vation was to be the product of "the grace" of God and that the
source of the revelation which came to the prophets was "the
Spirit of Christ within them." And he speaks of their "predicting
the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glory" which should
foUow them. In these two verses — packed as they are in every
word and phrase with deep doctrinal content — we can feel Peter's
assurance, perhaps reflecting the knowledge that he was simply
repeating what was already known to his Christian readers
through tradition. For it is beyond dispute that the Christian
Church from the beginning found in the Old Testament Scriptures,
and particularly in their prophetic sections, unmistakable refer-
ence to Jesus Christ and the salvation which he would accom-
plish in the providence of God and in his own good time (see
Mark 14:21, 27; Luke 24:44-47; John 2:17; 12:14-16; Acts
2:15-36).

The continuity between the Old Covenant and the New is
further elaborated in verse 12. Here it is explicitly stated that "the
things" with which the prophets dealt formed the content of "the
good news" which was preached later on to the Christians of
Peter's generation. Moreover, just as these things were "indicated
by the Spirit of Christ" to the prophets, so they were "announced"
by Christian evangelists, "through the Holy Spirit sent from
heaven" to Peter's readers!

Two points stand out with unmistakable clarity in this passage:
First, the fact that it owes much to the description of the Suffering

128 FIRST PETER 1:13-17

Servant in Second Isaiah. Both Jesus Christ himself and the
Church which he established interpreted his own sufferings in
terms of those of this Suffering Servant (compare Luke 22 : 37 with
Isa. 53: 12; Acts 8:32-33 with Isa. 53:7-8; Heb. 9:28 with Isa. 53:
12). Second, the phraseology of the passage contains clear sim-
ilarity to that in the Letter to the Hebrews. Thus, the fact that "the
things" constituting the "good news" were known and proclaimed
by the Old Testament prophetic characters is the theme of He-
brews, chapters 3 and 4 (see particularly 4:1-7). Similarly, the
idea that these prophetic figures were "serving not themselves but
you" has its certain counterpart in Hebrews 11:39-40, while the
reference to "angels" and their attachment to the gospel and its
proclamation is found in Hebrews 1:14 (see also Heb. 2:16).
There may even be an intended contrast between the fact that
"angels long to look" into the gospel and its nature (vs. 12) and
the tradition held by Hellenistic- Jewish Christians that the Law
had been "declared by angels" (Heb. 2:2; see also Acts 7:53;
Gal. 3:19).

The Sanctification the Gospel Requires (1:13 — ^2:10)

A Holy Life — God's Example and the Christian's Hope (1:13-17)

From this point forward to 5:11 Peter's style is largely horta-
tory. Here and there are interspersed sections of a purely doctri-
nal nature, but generally speaking doctrine forms an integral
part of the exhortation itself. The introductory word "therefore"
with which this section opens refers to the doctrinal passage which
precedes. Exhortation to holy living is based upon the theology
at which we have been looking. More specifically, such living may
be said to be the joint product of the grace of God the Father
(vss. 3, 10), the redemptive work of Christ (vss. 3, 7, 11), and
the mdwelUng of the Holy Spirit (vss. 2, 11, 12).

Following the pattern of the catechetical instruction given by
the Early Church to its new converts, at this point Peter begins
to lay stress upon the necessity of the holy Ufe for the Christian.
He sets it against the background of the pagan vices of the day and
represents the Christian hope as its motive. We have already seen
that he has set forth the "hope" of "the grace that is coming to
you at the revelation of Jesus Christ" (vs. 13) as a principal
theme for his readers' consideration (vss. 3,10-12). Neither here

FIRST PETER 1:18-21 129

nor elsewhere in the letter is Peter afraid of repetition, doubtless
using it — and quite properly so — as a pedagogical device. As be-
fore, therefore, we note that the "hope" is an eschatological one and
is not as yet entirely fulfilled in the experience of the Christian (see
vs. 5) . Peter's suggestion to his readers in the words "gird up your
minds, be sober" is nearly identical with Paul's in Ephesians 6: 14
("having girded your loins with truth"), and both are reminis-
cent of Isaiah's description of "the branch" of Jesse, of whom he
says that "righteousness shall be the girdle of his waist, and
faithfulness the girdle of his loins" (Isa. 11:5). All of these ex-
pressions reflect, of course, the oriental mode of dress with its
important cummerbund which forms the major support for the en-
tire ensemble.

Like Paul in Acts 17:30, Peter thinks of the pre-Christian life
of his readers as one characterized by "ignorance" (vs. 14) . Such
ignorance is found in the Jew as well as in the Greek (see Rom.
7:7), in both being essentially an ignorance of God's will for
man's life which expresses itself in giving way to "passions" (see
2:11; 4:2; Gal. 5:16-24). On the contrary, the "obedient" Chris-
tian is called upon to be "holy . . . in all . . . [his] conduct" (vs.
15), and this for the reason that God has made man in his image
and therefore to be holy as God himself is holy (vs. 16; see Lev.
19:2). The verse from Leviticus quoted here makes God himself
the pattern for man, who is in aU his ways to mirror the likeness of
this "holy" God. For a somewhat similar Christian use of this
imagery see II Corinthians 3:17-18. Peter reminds his readers
that God is not only "Father" but is also one "who judges each
one impartially according to his deeds" (vs. 17). "Fear" of this
holy God is accordingly not without its place in Christian exper-
ience, or, as Peter remarks, "throughout the time of your exile,"
that is, of one's absence from the heavenly order which is the
Christian's home (see vs. 1).

A Holy Life — ^Achieved by Christ's Death and Resurrection
(i:i8-2i)

Peter, however, has no illusions about the power of Christians
to emulate the high pattern set for them by the holy God. Indeed,
he affirms that our "faith and hope are in God" alone (vs. 21).
He has already said that this holy God is none other than "the God
and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ" (vs. 3). Accordingly, "be-
fore the foundation of the world" God had set his mind to working

130 FIRST PETER 1:22 — 2:3

out a plan of salvation whereby men might be "ransomed from
the futile ways inherited" from the past (vss. 18, 20). This method
of salvation involved the sending of Christ into the world that he
might die, be "raised" again "from the dead," and be glorified
"for your sake" (vss. 19-21).

Peter does not work out in detail for us the method whereby
the Christian's salvation to a holy life is achieved through the
death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. In language taken from
the slave market on the one hand, and the worship of the altar
on the other, he merely suggests that Christ's death has purchased
us for God (vss. 18-19). The word "ransomed" or "redeemed"
(Isa. 52:3) is one reminiscent of the slave market (Rom. 3:24;
I Cor. 6:20; 7:23), and to the Jew always brought to mind the
period of bondage in Egypt (Acts 7:30-37). In the Christian's
case the metaphor was used for his deUverance from "the futile
ways inherited from . . . [his] fathers." But the ransom price is
stated in sacrificial terms as having been constituted by "the
precious blood of Christ, like that of a lamb without blemish or
spot" (vs. 19; see Exod. 12:5; Lev. 9:3). Peter sees this work of
Christ in the perspective of eternity, from which "he was des-
tined," that is, predetermined, by God for the task of redemption
which he fulfilled (see also II Cor. 5:19). Like Paul, Peter sees
God as the creative agent in the resurrection of Christ; for it was
God "who raised him from the dead and gave him glory" (vs.
21; see I Cor. 15:20-28).

Peter's declaration that Jesus Christ "was made manifest at the
end of the times for your sake" (vs. 20) is indicative of the chro-
nology with which he is working. There can be no doubt that
whereas in verses 3, 7, and 13, as elsewhere in the letter, the
coming of Christ at the end of history is in mind, in verse 20 the
Incarnation is equally before the mind of the writer. Accord-
ingly, it is clear that for him "the end" includes the period of
history from the Incarnation forward, and that the entire period
of Church history may be identified with "the last times." In this
respect Peter is in accord with the other New Testament writers
who expressed themselves on the subject (see Acts 2:16-21; I Cor.
10:11; Heb. 1:2; I John 2:18).

A Holy Life — Generated by the Word (1:22 — 2:3)

In saying that the Christian's "confidence" is "in God" (vs. 21),
or in his "great mercy" (vs. 3) or "grace" (vss. 10, 13), Peter

FIRST PETER 1:22 — 2:3 131

has presented to his readers the ultimate source of their salva-
tion. He now indicates the means or instrument which God has
employed to accomplish his will in this matter. This instrument
is "the living and abiding word of God" (vs. 23) or "the good
news" (vs. 25), that is to say, the gospel "which was preached" to
these Christians and which resulted in their rebirth (vs. 23; see
also 2:2).

In this doctrine of the new birth Peter shows affinity with sev-
eral other New Testament writers. The teaching is essentially the
same as that at John 3:1-10. But the sowing of the "word of God"
which results in regeneration is also the theme of the parable of
the Sower (Matt. 13:1-9, 18-23). And the same series of ideas
(living word, sowing, rebirth) with natural variations in the use
of tenninology is found also abundantly in both Paul (I Cor.
1:18-25; 2:1-5; Eph. 1:13; Col. 1:5, 25; 3:16) and Hebrews
(4:2, 12; 13:7).

The response to this "word of God" or "good news" is that
"obedience to the truth" which results in purification (vs. 22).
Peter nowhere else in the letter uses the word "truth," but in 1 :2
he speaks of "obedience to Jesus Christ" and in 2 : 8 of those who
"disobey the word." We may put together the three passages
and through their conjoint testimony discover that the "obedi-
ence" which he has in mind is that relating to Jesus Christ, or
alternatively to the "truth," or to the "word." So that whether one
say "word," "gospel," "good news," "truth," or "Jesus Christ," it
would seem obvious that for Peter one is saying essentially the
same thing. For him Jesus Christ is the content of the word, of
the truth, of the gospel message. And there is considerable evi-
dence in the New Testament that for the Early Church such
equations were generally acceptable (Eph. 1:13; Col. 1:5, 25).
According to Acts 15:9, Peter had maintained that the Holy
Spirit had "cleansed their [the Gentiles'] hearts by faith." And
though the Greek is not identical, the meaning is essentially the
same as "having purified your souls," which Peter here says is
the result of "obedience to the truth" (1:22).

The result of this rebirth and obedience or purification is "sin-
cere love of the brethren" (vs. 22), or the putting away of "all
malice and all guile and insincerity and envy and all slander**
(2:1). And so the Christian trilogy of faith, hope, and love
is complete (see vss. 3, 9, 13 above for "faith" and "hope"; and
I Cor. 13:13; Heb. 10:39; 11:1; 13:1).

132 FIRST PETER 2:4-10

Peter's readers were evidently quite recent converts, as he styles
them "newborn babes" (2:2), an expression which in the Greek
refers to the youngest type of infant, a babe in arms (see Luke
2:12, 16; 18:15; Acts 7:19). The phrase is nowhere else used in
the New Testament in this spiritualized sense regarding converts,
though a somewhat similar one is used of those who are mere
"babes in Christ" in I Corinthians 3:1-2 and Hebrews 5 : 12-14. The
phraseology, indeed, of verses 2 and 3 is quite similar to that in
Hebrews 5:12 — 6:8. There is, however, a distinct difference in
that Hebrews blames its readers for not having gone on to matur-
ity, in view of the considerable lapse of time since their conver-
sion (see 5:12), whereas Peter expects his "newborn babes"
to continue to long for the "spiritual milk" which apparently
they still require.

A Holy Life — ^Incarnated in the Church (2:4-10)

This passage contains one of the most beautiful as well as most
comprehensive descriptions of the Christian Church to be found
in the New Testament. It has been suggested that it is derived
from the stanzas of a Christian hymn which Peter took over and
incorporated in his letter. In general it forms a Christian inter-
pretation of three passages from the Old Testament — Isaiah 28 : 16
(vs. 6); Psahn 118:22 (vs. 7); and Isaiah 8:14-15 (vs. 8). Other
Old Testament passages, however, are brought into use and phrases
from them adopted, as, for instance, Exodus 19:6 in verse 9;
Isaiah 43:20-21 in the same verse; and Hosea 1:6, 9 and 2:23 in
verse 10. Numerous phrases in the passage also link it to certain
sayings of Jesus in the Gospels, to the Letters of Paul, the Letter
to the Hebrews, and the Book of Revelation. Whether Peter con-
structed this section himself or inherited it in the tradition of the
Church, its author has done a masterly piece of work in describ-
ing the Christian Church — its origin, its nature, and its function.

The main teaching of the passage is to the effect that the Chris-
tian Church is "a spiritual house" (vs. 5; see Heb. 3:6), that is,
a house of worship whose cornerstone is the "living stone," Jesus
Christ himself (vs. 4; see Eph. 2:20) . Such a Church is constituted
itself of "living stones" (vs. 5; see Eph. 2:21-22; 4:15-16). Or,
to change the metaphor, since the "spiritual house" in question is
one for the worship of God, its household may be thought of as
"a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices" (vs. 5) — sacrifices
"acceptable to God through Jesus Christ," presumably because, as

FresT PETER 2:4-10 133

Peter has already indicated, it is through the work of Christ that
the Church is in the process of being saved (1:18-21). Or, once
again slightly changing the metaphor, this "spiritual house" is ac-
tually "a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God's
own people" (vs. 9), a passage in which the phrases quoted are
largely from Exodus 19 and 23 and from Isaiah 43, as suggested
above. Or, once again changing the metaphor and employing Hosea
1 and 2, the Christian household of faith may be described as
made up of those who "once . . . were no people but now . . .
are God's people; once . . . had not received mercy but now . . .
have received mercy" (vs. 10).

The center about which this entire description of the Church
revolves is the quotation in verse 7 from Psalm 118:22, a passage
cited elsewhere in the New Testament. According to the Gospel
writers, Jesus himself employed it with regard to himself (Matt.
21:42; Mark 12:10-11; Luke 20:17). Peter employs the verse in
a sermon (Acts 4:11) as well as in the present passage, and the
contiguous verses of the Psalm are used by other New Testament
writers. Peter, then, or the traditional hymn which he inserts in
his letter, attached to this verse from the Psalm two verses from
Isaiah (28:16 and 8:14-15) which also speak of "a stone" which
was "chosen and precious" in the sight of God but calculated to
"make men stumble" who did not accept Jesus Christ. (Paul also
employs the same passages and circle of ideas in Romans 9:25-33,
as well as the ideas from Hosea 1 and 2 found in verse 10.)

Implicit in the passage as a whole is the idea that Jesus Christ
is the great High Priest over God's "spiritual house," although
Peter neither here nor elsewhere applies this term to him; and that
the Church as a whole, as he says specifically, is under Christ "a
holy priesthood" or "a royal priesthood," performing "spiritual
sacrifices" (vs. 5) which are acceptable to God, even as Christ's
sacrifice was (see also Col. 1:24; Heb. 9:13-14; Rev. 1:6; 5:10;
20:6).

This idea of Jesus Christ as High Priest and of Christians as
priests, and of the personal sacrifices which both render in their
worship to God, is akin to the thought of Hebrews. It is striking
that in the one (Hebrews) Jesus Christ is called "high priest"
(6:20; 9:11; 10:21), though his followers are never called "a
priesthood," whereas in First Peter the situation is exactly re-
versed. His followers, as we have just seen, are called "a holy
priesthood" (vs. 5) and "a royal priesthood" (vs. 9), but Peter

134 FIRST PETER 2:11-12

never speaks of Jesus as "high priest." But perhaps the most strik-
ing similarity between this passage and Hebrews is found in their
joint teaching that the sin which characterizes those who "stumble"
upon the stone or rock which is Jesus Christ, is that "they disobey
the word" (vs. 8; see Heb. 3:18).

Three further points remain to be noted. First, the idea that
Jesus was "rejected by men but in God's sight chosen and precious"
(vs. 4) is similar in its teaching to that found in Peter's sermon at
Pentecost in Acts 2:22-36, and likewise the reference to the "won-
derful deeds of him who called you" (vs. 9) is akin in meaning
to the "mighty works and wonders and signs which God did"
through "Jesus of Nazareth, a man attested to you by God" in
Acts 2:22. Second, that the Christian readers of the letter have
been called "out of darkness into his [God's] marvelous Hght"
(vs. 9) is a common New Testament way of speaking of those
who are converted from paganism to the true faith (see Acts
26:18; Col. 1:13-14). The idea no doubt derives from such pas-
sages as Isaiah 42:6-7 and 16 in which the v/ork of the Servant
of the Lord is under consideration. Finally, the idea that the
readers once were "no people" and are now "God's people," that
they had at one time "not received mercy" but now "have received
mercy" (vs. 10), enshrines the very heart of the Christian gospel
as that is prefigured in the emblematic prophecy uttered by Hosea
with regard to his adulterous wife (Hosea 1 and 2).

Behavior Reflecting the Sanctified Life (2:11 — ^3:12)

Good Conduct Among Non-Christians (2:11-12)

The quotation from the hymn (if such it be) inserted in verses
4-10 above has served to establish the fact that the Christian com-
munity is the true people of God. Peter now turns, accordingly,
to a discussion of the behavior which should characterize that
people, particularly "among the Gentiles" (vs. 12). The word
here translated "Gentiles" both in the Greek and in the Hebrew
lying behind it actually means "nations," and Peter in employing
it is simply following the common New Testament practice (see
Rom. 2: 14; I Cor. 1 :23), thereby in a formal manner perpetuat-
ing the Jewish distinction between the people of God on the one
hand and the nations of the worid on the other. It is, however, only
in a formal sense that the Christian Church speaks of itself as "a

FIRST PETER 2:13-17 135

chosen race" and "a holy nation" (vs. 9), as though it were, so to
speak, a "third race" and thus distinct from both Jews and Gentiles.
Actually, of course, the Christian community is composed of peo-
ple of every race and nation without distinction. That this is
Peter's view is evidenced by his employing the terms "ahens and
exiles" (vs. 1 1 ; see 1:1) to describe the Christian community, a
mode of expression found also in Hebrews 11:13.

The "good conduct" which Christians are to practice includes
abstaining from "the passions of the flesh that wage war against
. . . [the] soul" (vs. 11). The exact Greek of this phrase is not
found elsewhere in the New Testament, its nearest equivalents be-
ing in Galatians 5: 16-17, 24; Ephesians 2:3; II Peter 2: 18; I John
2: 1 6. In the expression "flesh" stands, not for the physical consti-
tution of man as such, but rather for fallen human nature, that is,
for man's entire person under the dominion of sin. And the thought
that man's "flesh" in this sense is dominated by evil passions or
desires which are contrary to God's will for his life is a rather
common thought among the New Testament writers (see Rom.
7:7-25; 13:14; IThess. 4:5; James 1:14-15; Jude 16 and 18). The
old enemy of the fleshly passions remains alive to the very end
and in consequence the Christian must never sleep.

The suggestion in verse 12 that Gentiles through the "good con-
duct" of Peter's readers should be led to "see . . . [their] good deeds
and glorify God" is reminiscent of Jesus' saying in Matthew 5:16.
As Paul remarks in Ephesians 2:10, the reason for glorifying God
in this connection is the fact that he is himself the author of the
good works of Christians, an idea which, as we have already seen,
Peter has acknowledged (see 1:21, 22-25). The "day of visitation"
referred to is that indicated in Isaiah 10:3 (Greek translation) and
may be taken to mean generally the Day of Judgment

The Christian's Obedience to Constituted Authority (2:13-17)

We are now to look in detail at the nature of the "good conduct
among the Gentiles" which Peter pleads with his readers to main-
tain (vs. 12). This code of social ethics for the Christian has its
nearest parallels in Paul (Rom. 13:1-7; Eph. 5:21 — 6:9; Col. 3:12
— 4:1; I Tim. 2:1-15; 6:1-2; Titus 2:1 — 3:2). Some mention of it
is also found in James 4:6-10. But Peter's comprehensive state-
ment in verse 13 that the Christian is to "be subject for the Lord's
sake to every human institution" has no exact parallel for breadth
elsewhere in the Epistles. The code is obviously one of "submis-

136 FIRST PETER 2:13-17

sion" (vss. 13, 18; 3:1) or of subordination. As Peter sees it, this
principle is utterly universal and includes "every human institu-
tion," that is, every element in the social order. Moreover, such
subordination is "for the Lord's sake," an idea already implied in
verse 12 in the injunction to "good deeds" with a view to the Gen-
tiles' glorifying God.

Christians then are in a very real sense to know two masters
— God and man. The origin of such teaching may well be the
Church's Lord himself. For when confronted with the problem of
the Christian's attitude toward the state he remarked, "Render to
Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that
are God's" (Mark 12:17). By implication this means that the
Christian is to realize that he is not only a citizen of heaven but
as an "alien" and "exile" in the world he is also a citizen of the
state and therefore subject to "every human institution." That,
however, the Christian is to consider both God and the social or-
der his master on equal terms is neither the teaching of Jesus
(Matt. 6:24) nor that of the succeeding Church (Acts 4:19-20).

As the first and highest of the human institutions to which
Peter refers, stands, of course, the state. In the context in which
Peter was writing the state was represented by "the emperor as
supreme" (vs. 13), and by the "governors" of the various im-
perial and senatorial provinces (vs. 14) . Peter obviously sees in the
Roman Empire a system of law and order of which it may justly
be said that the aim is "to punish those who do wrong and to
praise those who do right." And in this judgment he was undoubt-
edly right, even as was also Paul (Rom. 13:3-4). Like Paul also,
Peter holds that such submission to the state is "God's will" for
the Christian (vs. 15), and that in his performance of his civic
duty the Christian may show himself an exemplary citizen of the
state (Rom. 13:1-2, 5). Peter's attitude in this matter seems to
suggest an early date for the letter, approximating that of Romans.

The principle underlying this submission to the state of which
Peter speaks and other types of which he will speak in the suc-
ceeding verses (2:18 — 3:7) is that which Paul terms "the glor-
ious liberty of the children of God" (Rom. 8:21; see also Gal.
5:13). Peter's statement of the principle approximates that in the
Galatians passage just cited — "Live as free men, yet without using
your freedom as a pretext for evil; but live as servants of God"
(vs. 16). The freedom of the Christian is not to be confused witli
license or with anarchy, for as Paul elsewhere says, "God is not

FIRST PETER 2:18-25 137

a God of confusion but of peace" (I Cor. 14:33). And Peter
knew as Paul did that Christian freedom was not a freedom to
sin but a freedom from sin and unto righteousness (Rom. 6:18).
"As servants of God," therefore. Christians should be model citi-
zens of the state.

In verse 17 we have perhaps the most comprehensive summary
of the Christian faith and ethic to be found anywhere in the New
Testament: "Honor all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God.
Honor the emperor." "Honor" is literally in the Greek "to set a
value upon," "to estimate at true worth," "to respect." The same
word is used with regard to the Christian's attitude toward aU
men, on the one hand, and toward the emperor, on the other. One
may almost say that Peter's maxim amounts to this: "Treat every
man as though he were a king." The tense of the verb, however, is
significantly altered in the two cases. The command regarding the
king literally means "go on honoring the emperor," as was suit-
able, since Christians, of course, as citizens of the state had al-
ways been doing just that. However, in the case of "all men" the
tense employed may be translated "begin to honor aU men" or,
better still, "begin to treat every man as though he were a king"!

The fact that one is to "love the brotherhood" is not intended
to militate against the law of love which Jesus laid down with re-
gard to "the neighbor," meaning by the neighbor every man (Luke
10:25-37). For love of the neighbor is included in the command
to "honor all men." But the Christian Church soon learned that
within the brotherhood, centering about Christ as Lord of life, a
new type of love had been bom. This was a love involving not
only respect for and utter commitment to one's neighbor's good,
but also a unique affection and understanding bom of a deep
spiritual and moral experience in Christ. The command to "fear
God" represents the typical Hebrew- Jewish attitude (Exod. 18:21;
Lev. 19: 14; Deut. 6:13), but it is also a worthy Christian motiva-
tion (see Acts 9:31; Rom. 3:18; II Cor. 5:11; 7:1; Eph. 5:21).
Such "fear" in the Hebrew idiom represented an intimate under-
standing of God's right to the highest respect from man, inasmuch
as he is the sovereign Lord in the moral order.

The Christian Servant's Submission to His Master (2:18-25)

Peter now turns from the state to the family as the recognized
unit of the Church's life (see Eph. 5:21 — 6:9), and he takes as
examples of the submissiveness which should be foimd in Chris-

138 FIRST PETER 2:18-25

tian family life the relation of servant to master and of wife to
husband, and the reverse. The tenn "be submissive" does not re-
fer to slavish obedience. It assumes that one submits himself to
the authority of another or of any "human institution," including
the state, and that he does so of his own free will and with a view
to serving higher ends.

The higher ends which are to be served are indicated by cer-
tain phrases, such as: "for the Lord's sake" (vs. 13), "as servants
of God" (vs. 16), "mindful of God" (vs. 19), "God's approval"
(vs. 20), "because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an
example, that you should follow in his steps" (vs. 21), "so that
some, though they do not obey the word, may be won without a
word by the behavior of their wives" (3:1).

In the present paragraph Peter does not have in mind Christian
"masters" exclusively; for those of whom he writes include the
"overbearing" (vs. 18), those because of whom the Christian serv-
ant ("houseboy," "slave") is "suffering unjustly" (vs. 19), those
of whom it may be said that, though Christian servants "do right,"
they nonetheless are called upon to "suffer for it" (vs. 20) . Again,
as in verse 12 above, it is clear that these illustrations have in
mind "good conduct among the Gentiles." In point of fact, many
Christians in the earhest period of the Christian movement were
slaves, and their masters by and large were pagans. Philemon (of
Colossae? — see Col. 4:9), to whom Paul addressed his notable
little letter on behalf of Onesimus, was clearly an exception to this
rule (Philemon 16-20).

At this point Peter adds a series of verses (vss. 21-25) which
serve to mark out the position of the Christian slave in the whole
Christian movement as being at its very center and serving to de-
fine its very nature. For the function of the Christian slave, says
Peter, is in reality a vocation (vs. 21), wherein the Christian
slave is "called," by following the "example" of Christ in whose
"steps" he walks, to set forth the characteristic of humility which
was his Master's. In calling to mind Christ's "example," Peter em-
ploys the language relating to the Suffering Servant of the Lord
in Isaiah 53, as for example in verse 22 — "he committed no sin;
no guile was found on his lips" (Isa. 53 :9) ; in verse 24 — "he him-
self bore our sins" (Isa. 53:4, 12); again in verse 24 — "by his
wounds you have been healed" (Isa. 53:5); and in verse 25 — "you
were straying like sheep" (Isa. 53:6). In addition, it has been
argued by some interpreters that in verse 24 we should read, not

FIRST PETER 3:1-6 139

"he himself bore our sins in his body on the tree," but, as in the
margin, "carried up our sins in his body to the tree." If this trans-
lation is adopted, then possibly Peter has in mind the imagery of
the "scapegoat" (Lev. 16:20-22), upon which the high priest on
the Day of Atonement was supposed to load all the sins of the
people. He then drove the "scapegoat" into the wilderness, and it
thus literally carried away the people's sins. Peter may similarly
be thinking of our Lord as carrying up the people's sins to the
tree (or cross) and thus dismissing them, as they were dismissed
in the wilderness by the "scapegoat."

Finally, in suggesting that Christian slaves "were straying like
sheep" (vs. 25), "but have now returned to the Shepherd and
Guardian of . . . [their] souls," Peter is calling upon a traditional
characterization of his Master which probably goes back to Jesus
himself (see Mark 6:34; 14:27; John 10:11-18; Heb. 13:20;
Rev. 7:17). As the great Shepherd of the sheep Jesus takes the
position which in prophetic thought has been accorded to God
himself (see Ps. 23; Isa. 40:11). Nowhere else in the New Testa-
ment is the Greek word which is here translated "Guardian" ap-
plied to our Lord. The word generally refers to an overseer of the
Christian community (Acts 20:28; Phil. 1:1; I Tim. 3:2; Titus
1:7), and later became the title of that official in the Christian
Church called in English "the bishop." The use of the two terms
here with reference to the Christian slave emphasizes the fact of
the direct approach of the Christian, however humble, to the Lord
himself, without mediation on the part of any other.

The Christian Wife's Subjection to Her Husband (3:1-6)

In asking that the wife "be submissive" (vs. 1), Peter is asking
no more than he does of all Christians (male and female) with
regard to duly constituted authority and "every human institution"
(2:13). And as in the case of aU "good conduct" expected of the
Christian generally (2:12), the motivation suggested is an evan-
gelistic one — so that "some . . . may be won without a word by
the behavior of their wives." The sort of adornment to which
Peter takes exception in verse 3, having to do as it does with
"braiding of hair, decoration of gold, and wearing of robes," is
quite similar to that suggested in I Timothy 2:9. Isaiah had long
before expostulated against just this sort of finery (3: 18-24), and
John in Revelation in somewhat similar terms describes the "great
harlot" Babylon (18:7, 16-17). In estimating the value of such

140 FIRST PETER 3:7

teaching on Peter's part, we should bear in mind the fact that
both rabbis and pagan moralists wrote in much the same vein, and
that doubtless all four (prophet, Peter, rabbi, and moralist) had in
mind the allurements practiced by profligate women in Jewish and
pagan society.

The permanent value of Peter's teaching, as of the others cited,
is to be found not in its negations but rather in its affirmations.
For certainly no exception can be taken to his suggestion that the
adornment of the Christian woman is to be that of "the hidden
person of the heart with the imperishable jewel of a gentle and
quiet spirit" (vs. 4). It is this "jewel" which God "who sees in
secret" (Matt. 6:4, 6, 18) accounts "very precious."

Verse 6, alone in the New Testament, carries the implication
that the wife is to "obey" as well as "be submissive" to her hus-
band. It is to be noticed, however, that here the point refers to the
fact that "Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord." It is note-
worthy that Peter proceeds, "And you are now her children," not
if you also obey, but rather "if you do right and let nothing terrify
you."

The Christian Husband in Relation to His Wife (3:7)

This single verse of instruction to the Christian husband carries
a great weight of responsibility. There is nothing quite like it else-
where in the New Testament, the nearest parallels being found in
Ephesians 5:25-33 and Colossians 3: 19 (see also I Cor. 7:1-7). In
none of these passages are husbands enjoined to "be submissive"
to their wives, as is the case in reverse. This is no doubt due to the
fact that the submissiveness enjoined throughout from 2:13 on-
ward and in the parallel passages cited is one which recognizes a
duly constituted headship in each "human institution" (2:13). As
in the state the emperor is head, so in the family it is to be ac-
knowledged that the husband is head. Such headship in Christian
circles is recognized as similar to that of Christ to his Church
(Eph. 5:23-24), a headship of love, for as Paul says, "the
husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the
church, his body, and is himself its Savior." Therefore, as he con-
tinues (Eph. 5:25), husbands are to love their wives "as Christ
loved the church and gave himself up for her." Indeed, the hus-
band's headship is limited to his being "the great lover" in the
family, even as Christ is the great lover of his Church and is its
Savior.

FIRST PETER 3:8-12 141

There can be no doubt that Peter is here dealing with the same
circle of ideas as he suggests to husbands, "Live considerately
with your wives, bestowing honor on the woman as the weaker
sex" (vs. 7). In the Greek, "considerately" is literally "accord-
ing to knowledge." That "the woman" is to be honored as "the
weaker sex" impUes the sort of paradoxical reversal of values
which carries through the whole of the Christian ethic and is akin
to the suggestion already made at 2: 17, to the effect that all men
are to be treated as though they were kings! It is as though Peter
were saying that it is in the woman's weakness that her strength
is to be found; not in physical prowess but in moral and spiritual
(and no doubt also intellectual) qualities does her strength reside.

The ultimate reason for the Christian husband's so treating his
wife is found in the fact that they are equally "heirs of the grace
of life," and its aim is that their "prayers may not be hindered."
Wife and husband are, in other words, on a spiritual par in the
sight of God and, therefore, should be so in the sight of each
other. Though the phraseology here is different, this exactly ac-
cords with the teaching of Jesus and of Paul regarding the moral
and spiritual equality of men and women (Matt 5:27-32; Mark
10:2-12; I Cor. 7).

Summary: Christian Behavior for All (3:8-12)

And now Peter summarizes for all his Christian readers the
nature of the Christian ethic as it apphes more particularly within
the sphere of the brotherhood (vs. 8; see 2:17). In verse 8 he
gives a comprehensive statement of Christian attitudes as these
unfold from within and express themselves in outward action. It
would seem that this verse should be read in reverse — ^the "humble
mind," which realizes its own unworthiness in the sight of God
and men, naturally expressing itself in "a tender heart" toward
those who are in like fashion unworthy, such "a tender heart"
finding room for "love of the brethren" as its normal expression,
issuing in "sympathy," which in turn gives birth to "unity of
spirit."

"Humble mind" represents an attitude which Peter considers
basic to the Christian ethic, as is shown in the fact that in 5:5 he
practically dupHcates this comprehensive statement in 3:8. This
"rock" man, whose spirit in the early days had been exceedingly
hard to tame (Mark 8:31-33; John 13:8-9), had himself learned
humility the hard way! But he had learned it

142 FIRST PETER 3:13-17

At this point Peter quotes from Psalm 34:12-16 (vss. 10-12).
This Psalm as a whole serves as a definition of the "poor man"
(see Ps. 34:6), or the humble person, who finds that his help lies
only in God, not in other men nor in self (see Matt. 5:3).

Stated both negatively and positively, then, the Christian is not
to "return evil for evil or reviling for reviling" (see Matt. 5:39,
44; Luke 6:28; Rom. 12:14-21); rather he is to "bless" that he
"may obtain a blessing" himself (vs. 9). Literally the Greek here
reads "Bless . . . that you may inherit a blessing," which is much
like the third beatitude — "Blessed are the meek, for they shall in-
herit the earth" (Matt. 5:5). And it is striking that this beatitude
of Jesus is actually a quotation from Psalm 37:11 (a Psalm in
which the "meek" man is defined), and that "poor" and "meek"
in Hebrew are essentially the same word. It is, says Peter, to such
a "humble mind" or to such meekness that the Christian is
"called." Such humble-mindedness issues in blessedness both for
the man himself and for all whom his life touches. Again, as we
have seen previously (1:15; 2:9, 21), Peter thinks of all Chris-
tians as having received a vocation or "call" from God to lead
the Christian life in its purity and fullness.

Sanctification Under Fire: Persecution for Righteousness'
Sake (3:13—5:11)

Making Christ Lord (3J13-17)

Peter now begins to deal realistically with the situation in which
his readers are found. And, as we shall discover at 4:12, this in-
volves the presence of actual persecution. To be sure, Peter ap-
proaches this realistic situation somewhat cautiously, so much so
that some have imagined that it was during the writing of the let-
ter that he heard of the "fiery ordeal" which his readers were
actually facing at the moment. This, it is said, explains the fact
that not until 4: 12 is actual mention made of present persecution.
It would appear rather that, as indicated in the outline, the thought
of "persecution for righteousness' sake" or of "sanctification under
fire" is a major theme which Peter has had in mind from the be-
ginning of the letter. It is because the Christian's "holy life," like
that of the prophets before him and of his Lord, is under fire that
Peter finds occasion to write to his readers at all. The section be-
fore us serves as an introduction to the final major division of the

FIRST PETER 3:13-17 143

letter, in which this climactic note of suffering for righteousness'
sake becomes the dominant theme.

As he opens this new theme Peter immediately strikes the high-
est note possible for the Christian who is faced with the necessity
of undergoing persecution for his faith. Indeed, this note repre-
sents the only motivation that can find logical justification within
the Christian philosophy of life. This motivation may be stated in
either of two ways, both of them representing the very heart of
the gospel message. These are — "suffer for righteousness' sake"
(vs. 14), and "in your hearts reverence Christ as Lord" (vs. 15).
These two motivations can be traced back to the teaching of Jesus
himself (see Matt. 5: 10-12; Mark 8:34-38). Indeed, the first part
of verse 14 sounds like a quotation of the eighth Beatitude (Matt.
5:10). Similarly, the first part of verse 15 is without doubt Peter's
version of the common Christian tradition which Paul voic^ in I
Corinthians 12:3: "No one can say 'Jesus is Lord' except by the
Holy Spirit."

It is perhaps suggestive of the dual character (Gentile and Jew-
ish) of his Christian readers' backgrounds that Peter at this point
employs in the Greek two words of an abstract sort to suggest the
ideal for which Christian suffering is undertaken — "what is right"
(vs. 13) and "righteousness" (vs. 14). The two terms, express-
ing respectively the Greek and Hebrew conceptions of the ideal
for man, are intended to stand for the same thing and both to-
gether represent the holy life which aU along Peter has been set-
ting forth as the Christian ideal. The Christian is not to allow any
secular phenomenon to "terrify" (vs. 6) him or to fear lest it may
"harm" (vs. 13) him. Those who are terrified and fear the harm
which the world can do to them usually indulge in "reviling" (vs.
9), as our modern psychology now agrees. Neither the inner fear
nor the outward expression of returning "evil for evil" and "revil-
ing for reviling" are to be the Christian's attitude.

Peter has already drawn upon Isaiah 8: 14-15 — a messianic pas-
sage— for his reference to "a stone that will make men stumble, a
rock that will make them fall" (2:8). He now calls upon verses
12-13 of the same chapter in Isaiah as he says with regard to
what the world can do to the Christian: "Have no fear of them,
nor be troubled, but in your hearts reverence Christ as Lord" (vss.
14-15).

The Christian then is always to be "prepared to make a defense
to any one who calls . . . [him] to account for the hope that is in

144 FIRST PETER 3:18-22

. . . [him]" (vs. 15). As we have ah-eady observed (1:3, 13), this
is the eschatological "hope" relatiog to the Final Coining, as the
passages cited indicate. It is by no means an uncertain or weak
element of the Christian faith; rather, it is "a sure and steadfast
anchor of the soul," since it rests upon the saving activity of the
incarnate Christ (see Heb. 6:19-20 and the comment on I Peter
4:18-22). The Christian's "defense," however, is always to be
"with gentleness [meekness] and reverence," not with arrogant self-
assertiveness (vs. 15; see Matt. 5:5; II Cor. 10:1; Gal. 6:1).

The proper armor of the Christian who is reviled by the secular
world is "good behavior in Christ" (vs. 16), for there is nothing
short of this which wiQ make it possible for the Christian to keep
his "conscience clear" (literally, "a good conscience"; see Acts
23:l;ITim. 1:5, 19; II Tim. l:3;Heb. 13:18; and I Peter 3:21).
As before at 2: 15, behind the Christian's conscience stands "God's
will" (vs. 17). That "will" stands as the Lord of the conscience;
it alone is the standard for what is "the good" or "righteousness."

Example of Christ's Suffering and Resurrection (3:18-22)

This section contains what is probably the most difficult prob-
lem of interpretation in the entire letter. The general teaching of
the section, however, is clear enough. Employing some of the
same terminology as at 2:21-25 (a passage which in turn employs
the phraseology of Isaiah 53 relating to the Suffering Servant),
Peter points out that Jesus Christ is at once Savior of and example
to Christians, inasmuch as he "died for sins once for all, the right-
eous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God" (vs. 18).
This death was followed by "the resurrection of Jesus Christ, who
has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God" (vss. 21-22).
The passage has numerous other New Testament parallels (for ex-
ample, Acts 2:22-36; Rom. 6:1-11; Phil. 2:5-11; Heb. 2:10-18).

Possibly in verse 18, instead of "died," we should read "suf-
fered" (see margin). The passage would then parallel 2:21 and
would correspond to the phraseology in 3 : 14 immediately above.
This reading, if correct, has the advantage of stating explicitly
that Christ's sufferings are to be an example to us, who like him
are called upon to "suffer" and thus fulfill "God's wiU" for our
lives (vs. 17), even as Christ was himself doing in dyiag for our
sins (2:20-21). Peter's suggestion that Christ died "that he might
bring us to God" approximates the thought of Paul (Rom. 5:2;
Eph. 2:17-18; 3:12), and that of the author of Hebrews (4:16;

FIRST PETER 3:18-22 145

7:25; 10:1, 22). Such phraseology suggests that the end and aim
of the Christian faith is to restore that fellowship with God on
man's part which was broken by man's rebellion in the Garden of
Eden (Gen. 3:22-24).

Jesus is able thus to "bring us to God" (vs. 18), because his
death was followed by resurrection and ascension to "the right
hand of God" (vss. 21-22), where "angels, authorities, and
powers" have become "subject to him." ITiis again is the same
teaching as that found in the passages cited above — Jesus' death
is followed by resurrection, a resurrection which implies his ac-
ceptance by God and his assumption of God's power. Needless to
say, the assumption of such power on Jesus' part results in the
salvation of the people for whom he died.

It is obvious from the passage that induction into Christ by
"baptism" (vs. 21) is assumed by Peter as the visible and formal
method through which the salvation offered in Christ's death and
resurrection is applied to the believer. It is clear, too, that for him
such baptism is not to be conceived in any mechanical sense (the
thought no doubt intended in the words "not as a removal of dirt
from the body"); rather it is to be understood as "an appeal to
God for a clear conscience," that is, as a rite signifying an inner
or spiritual change in the life of the believer. Such teaching with
regard to the significance of baptism as the initial sacrament of
the Christian faith is also to be illustrated elsewhere in the New
Testament (Acts 2:38; 8:16, 36-38; Rom. 6:4; Col. 2:12). It is
only, therefore, in this deep spiritual sense that it may be said that
baptism "now saves you." For this rite signifies that the believer
has been inducted into Christ and has "put on Christ" (Gal. 3:27;
see Rom. 6:4).

The portion of the passage which we have referred to as dif-
ficult of interpretation is that found between the phrases "being
put to death" and "saved through water" (vss. 18-20). Various
suggestions for interpretation have been made, as follows: (1) it
is suggested that verses 18-22 constitute a baptismal hymn to
Christ, and that Peter incorporated this well-known hymn into the
body of his letter as he had already done previously at 2:4-10
with a Christian hymn in praise of the Christian Church; (2) in
the Greek, the introductory words in verse 19 ("in which he")
may with a slight change be made to read rather "Enoch," or per-
haps better "in which also Enoch," and it is therefore suggested
that Peter here is referring, not to something which Jesus did in

146 FIRST PETER 3:18-22

the spirit, but rather to the work of the patriarch Enoch (see Gen.
5:21-24), as this is reported in the apocryphal work of First Enoch
(ch. 6); (3) the alternative possibility is suggested that these
words should read "in which Noah" on the basis of the fact that
the incident referred to occurred "in the days of Noah" (vs. 20) ;
(4) the usual interpretation is that Peter is referring to what oc-
curred in our Lord's experience between his death and resurrec-
tion; namely, that after his "death in the flesh," but while still
"alive in the spirit" (vs. 18), he took occasion to descend, as the
Creed suggests, "into hell" or alternatively "into Hades or Sheol,"
that is, into the abode of the dead, and that he there "preached
to the spirits in prison" (vs. 19) ; finally (5) the suggestion is made
that it is the pre-existent Christ to whom Peter refers as "alive in
the spirit" and who "in the days of Noah" had "preached to the
spirits" through his servant Noah — spirits who were incarnate or
living men in Noah's day but who had since become "spirits in
prison," that is, in hell or Sheol, because they did not respond to
the preaching of Christ through Noah.

All of these interpretations have, as may easily be seen, points
to commend them, and all equally have others which may be cited
against them. It is this which makes the passage so very difficult
of interpretation. It may be remarked that there is no other pas-
sage in the New Testament quite like this one; those most nearly
approximating to its teaching are Romans 10:5-7 and Ephesians
4:8-10. If we feel impelled by the evidence to adopt the more
common interpretation outlined above under (4), then several
observations may justifiably be made. First, it is to be noted that
no doctrine of purgatory with attendant Masses for the dead,
works of supererogation, and the like, intended to dehver "the
spirits in prison" by mechanical means manipulated by an al-
mighty church, can remotely be substantiated by the passage.
Second, Peter introduced this difficult passage to indicate how
"God's patience" extends not only to the Uving but also to the
dead "spirits in prison," a view which, although differently ex-
pressed, is in line with the gracious character of God as outlined
throughout the Old and New Testaments (see, for example, Rom.
5: 15-21; I Cor. 15:22; I Tim. 2:3-4). Third, Peter must have had
the subsidiary motive of drawing out an analogy to baptism (vs.
21), which he finds strangely enough in the salvation accorded
by the "ark" to "eight persons," who "in the days of Noah . . .
were saved through water" (vs. 20). To our minds the analogy

FIRST PETER 4:1-11 147

may seem far-fetched, but parallels for such analogies may be
found in the teachings of the rabbis of the period and even in the
writing of the Apostle Paul, who finds an analogy to baptism in
the experience of Israel at the Red Sea (I Cor. 10:2) and to the
Lord's Supper in the Israelites' being sustained by "supernatural
food" and "supernatural drink" during the period of the wilder-
ness wandering (I Cor. 10:3-4). However we may interpret this
difficult passage, we must agree that it lies on the periphery of
Christian truth.

Sharing Christ's Sufferings and Sinlessness in the Flesh (4:1-11)

Having established the fact that it is the Christian's obligation to
make Christ his Lord (3:15-17), and further having portrayed
the example of suffering which this Lord has undergone "for sins"
(3: 18-22), in the present passage Peter unhesitatingly exhorts his
readers to emulate the sufferings and sinlessness of their Lord. In
enjoining this imitation of Christ, as before (2:12) Peter is con-
scious of the Gentile world surrounding the Christian community
as an ocean of evil might surround an island of purity (vs. 3).
His readers are to "let the time that is past suffice for doing
what the Gentiles like to do." Their actions are not to be affected
in any way when these Gentiles "are surprised that . . . [they] do
not now join them in the same wild profligacy" in which they in-
dulge themselves (vs. 4), although "abuse" is likely to result.
Peter consoles his readers, moreover, with the thought that these
Gentiles "will give account to him who is ready to judge the living
and the dead" (vs. 5).

It is not suffering in general that Peter has in mind but, as the
whole letter shows, it is suffering "for righteousness' sake" (3:14),
the only Christian suffering which could legitimately be parallel
to that of the Christian's Lord. One who has thus vicariously suf-
fered in the flesh may be said to have "ceased from sin," or per-
haps better, to have "done with sin." The form of the verb in the
Greek suggests an active determination to cease from sin, illus-
trated in the willingness of the Christian to suffer vicariously for
righteousness' sake. Moreover, this interpretation is borne out
by the following verse, which declares that the purpose of the
Christian to have done with sin is "so as to live for the rest of the
time in the flesh no longer by human passions but by the will of
God" (vs. 2). Peter is not saying, then, as some of the Jewish
rabbis said, that suffering and death on the part of an individual

148 FIRST PETER 4: 1-1 1

achieved atonement from sin for him. On the contrary, he is say-
ing, if we understand his thought, that suffering "for righteousness*
sake" is an indication that one has determined once for all to
come to grips with the problem of sin and to have done with it,
living his Ufe henceforward "by the will of God" (see Rom.
6:15-19).

There are a number of parallels in the New Testament to the
Gentile sins of which Peter gives a catalogue in verse 3 (see Rom.
1:28-32; Gal. 5:19-21; Eph. 5:3-5; Col. 3:5-9; I Tim. 1:8-11;
Rev. 21:8; 22:15). The references cited are only a selection of
the more obvious passages cataloguing the current sins of the day.
It need not startle us that Peter suggests that the Gentiles were
"surprised" at Christians for their unwillingness to "join them in
the same wild profligacy" (vs. 4) . The high ethical standards set
forth in the Scriptures had constantly to battle against the profli-
gacy of the surrounding paganism, in which it was by no means
obvious that religion and morals have any necessary relation the
one to the other. And Peter as before (3:18) asserts that it was
because pagans did not see this connection that "the gospel was
preached even to the dead," that they might, so to speak, be given
a "chance" to accept the truth. The same difficulty arises in con-
nection with this saying in verse 6 as in 3:18-22. Whatever the
expression "to the dead" both here and in the former passage may
mean, it is at least clear that here Peter compares human judg-
ment according to standards which are current on earth with the
eternal life which is lived in the presence of God. And in the con-
text of the passage as a whole, his meaning is that, whatever may
be the standards employed for men's judgments in this life, his
readers should remember that "the gospel" as preached — wherever
this is done, whether to the living or the dead — proclaims a Ufe
"in the spirit" whose only possible norm or standard is the life of
God.

In this passage Peter also presents a short resume of the type of
ethical living expected of the Christian in view of the imminence
of the divine judgment. "The end of all things is at hand; there-
fore keep sane and sober for your prayers" (vs. 7). Such state-
ments need not be pressed to mean that the author in question
expected that the end of history was just around the corner. All
that they need mean is that from the Incarnation forward the
Christian Church is living in "the last time" (see 1:5). The cer-
tainty of judgment, however, is suggested as a motive for right

FIRST PETER 4:12-19 1 49

living, and this same motivation is attributed in the New Testa-
ment to Jesus himself (Mark 13:32-37; see also I Thess. 5:1-11).

Peter sets certain Christian characteristics over against the
"human passions" of Gentile living. The formula follows some-
what the pattern set by Paul in Galatians 5 : 1 6-24, in which he
speaks on the one hand of the "works of the flesh" (vs. 19), and
on the other, of the "fruit of the spirit" (vs. 22). And similariy,
the "gift," of which Peter speaks as being the product of "God's
varied grace" (vs. 10), reminds one of Paul's reference to the
"varieties of gifts" which are given by "the Spirit" to the members
of "the body of Christ" (I Cor. 12).

In suggesting that Christians should have "love for one another,
since love covers a multitude of sins" (vs. 8), Peter may be using
a well-known quotation from Proverbs 10:12 (see also James
5:20). Love is prepared to overlook, to forgive, to bear with, and
so in a real sense to "cover" the sins of others (see I Cor. 13:7).
"Hospitality" (vs. 9) among Christian brethren was a most de^
sirable trait in a community almost isolated from its pagan
neighbors (see Rom. 12: 13; I Tim. 3:2; Titus 1:8; Heb. 13:2).

The motivation for such Christian living, as is expressed else-
where in the New Testament in varied forms, is "in order that in
everything God may be glorified through Jesus Christ" (vs. 11; see
I Cor. 10:31). The present section, which follows the pattern of
catechetical instruction, ends with a doxology: "To him belong
glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen" (vs. 11). It is al-
most identical with that found in Romans 16:27. It is also quite
similar to the second-century addition to the Lord's Prayer (Matt.
6:13, see margin), an addition which is patterned after the dox-
ology found in David's prayer in I Chronicles 29: 1 1-13.

Sharing Christ's Sufferings and Glory (4:12-19)

Some have thought that at this point in the letter Peter learns
for the first time that "the fiery ordeal" of persecution is being
experienced by the Christians to whom he is writing (vs. 12). The
Greek translated "which comes upon you" may be rendered so as
to refer to a present experience ("which is presently upon you").
But again, it lends itself also to the meaning "which is about to
come upon you." In any case, Peter's point is threefold: first,
whenever "fiery ordeal" of persecution comes upon the Christian
he should understand that it is within the will of God and is in-
tended to "prove" him (that is, to "put him to the test"); second,.

150 FIRST PETER 4:12-19

such testing is neither new nor strange; and third, the Christian
should always be prepared to "rejoice" at sufferings which mean
that he is being "reproached for the name of Christ" (vs. 14), or
that he is suffering "as a Christian" (vs. 16). All three points are
clearly made by Peter, no matter what the exact experience may
be to which he refers in the phrase "the fiery ordeal."

The striking contrast between the two possible causes of suffer-
ing— on the one hand, "for the name of Christ" or "as a Chris-
tian," and on the other, "as a murderer, or a thief, or a wrong-
doer, or a mischief-maker" (vs. 15) — ^brings before the mind of
the reader the picture of Christ between the two thieves. These
men apparently were not robbers of the ordinary type; presum-
ably they were revolutionaries or extreme nationalists. And the
words in verse 15 may very well describe just such political
agitators.

There can be no doubt that the early group of followers about
Jesus was at first strongly attracted to the idea of a nationalistic
messiah, one who would deliver the Jews from the hands of their
oppressors, the Romans (see Acts 1:6). Perhaps we should see
in both Simon the Zealot and Judas Iscariot former members of
this inner circle of revolutionaries. It is even possible that Peter's
loss of faith in his Master and the movement for which he stood
was due to his own concept of the nationalist movement and its
nationalist messiah (see Matt. 26:58; Mark 14:26-31, 47-50; John
18:10-27). It would seem likely, then, that in the present pas-
sage Peter is concerned to point out to his Christian readers,
whatever their background may be, that reproach "for the name
of Christ" means something far more significant than suffering for
a mere worldly or nationalistic messiah. For Jesus is not a mere
nationaUstic messiah but rather is God's Messiah, and to suffer for
him is to "glorify God" (vs. 16) because "his glory" is God's
glory, and to share his name and his reproach is to share "the
spirit of glory and of God" (vs. 14) .

"Glory," in both Hebrew and Greek, stands for the mani-
fested presence of a person, in this case that of God or Christ. In
both languages the term was used for the luminous cloud which
appeared between the cherubim on the Ark of the Covenant (Lev.
16:2; Num. 16:42) and on rare occasions was said even to fiU
the entire Temple itself (I Kings 8:10-11). Peter has already sug-
gested that Christians are to share in the "praise and glory and
honor" of Christ at his appearing (1:7, 13), and no doubt he has

FIRST PETER 4:12-19 151

that same eschatological event in mind in the present passage
(vs. 13) . At the same time, he appears to have also in mind that at
the very time one is "reproached for the name of Christ," the
blessing of "the spirit of glory and of God" is a present experience
and "rests upon" the Christian in the very midst of his reproach
(vs. 14).

By way of justifying the Christian's attitude in the face of the
fiery ordeal, the reproach, and the suffering "for the name of
Christ," Peter now returns to the thought of the coming Judg-
ment. From the time of Amos forward, the prophets and other
biblical writers had spoken of "the day of the Lord" or the Day
of Judgment (Amos 5: 18-20; Ezek. 30: 1-3) as a future prospect.
But Christians are conscious of the fact that even now they are
living in the "last times," as we have already seen; "the end of aU
things is at hand" (vs. 7 above) and "the time has come for judg-
ment to begin" (vs. 17). Also from the time of Amos forward
the thought had been prominently expressed that God's people
would be the first to experience his judgment (Amos 3:2). Peter
voices his agreement with this thought when he says, "The time
has come for judgment to begin with the household of God."

God's people, however, are not to expect anything other than
impartiahty on the part of God. If God's people are to be vindi-
cated, it will be because they are prepared to "suffer according to
God's will" and "do right and entrust their souls to a faithful
Creator" (vs. 19). God's absolute demand that men "do right"
regardless of consequences is justified, because God is the "faithful
Creator" who fulfills his promises to his people, and therefore
they may without reserve "entrust their souls" to him.

The warning to those "who do not obey the gospel of God'*
(vs. 17) may be taken as the equivalent of the previous warning
to those who "disobey the word" (2:8; 3: 1, 20). The word in all
of these cases is the word as preached, the equivalent of the
"gospel." This "word" or "gospel" contains an account not only
of God's redemptive love but also of his wrath against the dis-
obedient who do not accept that love. It is notable that here, as
in Hebrews 3 and 4, "disobedience" is the cardinal sin because of
which men are lost. Accordingly, in the quotation from Proverbs
11:31 (vs. 18) "the righteous man" who is "saved" is the one who
accepts the gospel in faith, while "the impious and sinner" will be
the one who rejects it and refuses to live out its implications for
human living.

152 FIRST PETER 5:1-11

Consequent Duties o£ Christians (5:1-11)

In this final section of the letter, so much of which has been
devoted to exhortation of one sort or another, Peter addresses
various groups in the Christian community, particularly those
whom he calls "elders" (vs. 1) and the "younger" people (vs. 5).
At least the first of these groups represents persons holding some
official status in the local communities, as Peter's description of
himself as "a fellow elder" and his charge to them — "Tend the
flock of God that is your charge" (vs. 2) — serve to indicate. In
Judaism the "elder" was a leader in the synagogue as well as in
some cases a member of the Sanhedrin (see Mark 8:31; Acts
4:5, 8; 6: 12; 23: 14). In the Greek world "elders" had both civic
and religious duties, and a group of them might constitute the
ruling body of the city. The Christian Church took over this
office with its rich background, and in many communities it
doubtless represented the sole leadership in the local Christian
community (see Acts 14:23; 20:17).

That Peter should speak of himself here merely as "a fellow
elder" rather than as an Apostle should not be considered strange.
It would certainly have been unseemly for Peter to lack the very
humility which he was about to enjoin upon his readers (vss. 5-6) .
Moreover, his apostolic authority is sufficiently cared for in the
description of himself further as "a witness of the sufferings of
Christ as well as a partaker in the glory that is to be revealed."
Probably none of his readers could make a claim such as this
(see 1:8). In any case, it was Peter's personal relation to Jesus
Christ which made him an ambassador with full power of dis-
pensing the gospel, or, as he prefers, "a witness" to the great facts
of that gospel. It is to be noted that in this passage the twofold
theme of "sufferings" and "glory" is carried through along the
same lines as elsewhere in the letter (1:11;2:21;3: 14-15, 18-22;
4:1, 13). The "elders" also are to share in these "sufferings of
Christ" as they "tend the flock of God" in the expectation that
they "will obtain the unfading crown of glory" along with him
(vs. 4).

Their work is to be carried on under the supervision of "the
chief Shepherd,'* a term nowhere else found in the New Testa-
ment, though the idea for which it stands is of course prominent in
a number of passages (Mark 14:27; John 10:11; Heb. 13:20).
The elders of the Church, therefore, are to think of themselves as

FIRST PETER 5:1-11 153

shepherds serving under this "chief Shepherd," and the congre-
gation allotted to their care is called "the flock of God" (vs. 2).
The main characteristics of their service as undershepherds are
to be willingness, eagerness, and lack of the domineering spirit
which is so characteristic of those occupying a secular ofl&ce. In
general, the instruction given to these pastors is similar to that
which Jesus gave to his own disciples, to whom he said that those
who would be "first" should be "last," and that the leader should
be as the "servant of all" (Mark 9:35).

The 'Vounger," though the word is masculine in the Greek,
may refer to younger people generally and is so imderstood by
most students. A few commentators have thought that the word
referred to officebearers, possibly the equivalent of "deacons"
(see Acts 5:6). It is more likely, however, that the "younger" are
here addressed as over against their "elders" in age, inasmuch as
no suggestion is made regarding any function which they are to
perform. Like all other members of the Christian community they
are simply enjoined to "be subject," that is, to recognize the fact
that in any community, including the Christian fellowship, law
and order must be maintained. This same principle relates to all
members of the community, as we have already seen (2:1 3 — 3 : 7) .

Peter now speaks to the laity generally (vss. 5b-ll), saying
three things in particular. First, he says, "Clothe yourselves, all of
you, with humility toward one another" (vs. 5). Already (2:13-
17) such humihty has been set in the context of God's over-aU
sovereignty with reference to "every human institution" (2:13;
see Prov. 3:34). To observe such "humility toward one another"
is actually to place oneself "under the mighty hand of God" (vs.
6) . And Peter proceeds to suggest, very much after the manner of
Jesus himself (Mark 10: 35-45) , that those who thus submit to the
sovereignty of God are to expect that "in due time" he wiQ "ex-
alt" them.

Second, after the manner of Matthew 6:25-34, Peter suggests:
"Cast all your anxieties on him, for he cares about you" (vs. 7).
In view of the providential care of his Creator, the Christian is to
live his Ufe without undue anxiety.

Third, the Christian is to "be sober, be watchful" (vs. 8). This
is like the teaching in I Thessalonians 5:6 — a letter which Sil-
vanus had a share in writing, as he did in the case of the present
letter (vs. 12; see I Thess. 1:1). Such teaching, however, is found
in numerous other passages in the New Testament and can be

154 FIRST PETER 5:12-14

traced back to our Lord himself (Matt. 26:41; Mark 13:32-37),
The need of such sobriety and watchfulness is associated with
the fact that "your adversary the devil prowls around like a roar-
ing lion, seeking someone to devour." It seems clear that Peter
here equates the work of "the devil" with the "experience of
suffering" of which he has been speaking throughout the letter
(vs. 9; see 4:12-14). This suffering is occasioned of course by
men, and it would seem therefore that Peter uses the term "the
devil" in a metaphorical sense to refer to the general and cor-
porate evil of humanity with which the Christian "brotherhood
throughout the worid" has to deal.

The Christian is to remember that such suffering is for only "a
little while" (vs. 10; see Heb. 10:37), that is, throughout the
period remaining until "the God of all grace, who has called you
to his eternal glory in Christ, will himself restore, establish, and
strengthen you." The teaching here is very similar to that in I
Thessalonians 5:1-11 and II Thessalonians 2:1-12, the two letters
in which Silvanus also had a part. The hortatory and didactic por-
tion of the epistle now ends with a suitable doxology in verse 11.

CLOSING GREETINGS
I Peter 5:12-14

As we have already noted, this letter is almost exclusively ex-
hortation (vs. 12; see also Heb. 13:22). "Silvanus," the name of
Peter's amanuensis or stenographer, is a Latin form and prob-
ably is to be equated with the Greek "Silas." This Silas was
originally a man of prominence in the Jerusalem church (Acts
15:22, 27, 32). He became a companion of Paul on his mission-
ary journeys (Acts 15:40; 16:19, 25, 29; 17:4; 18:5), and Paul
associated him with himself in his preaching (II Cor. 1:19) and
writing (I Thess. 1:1; II Thess. 1:1). That Peter should use the
Latin form of his name may have some connection with the fact
that "Babylon" is possibly a pseudonym employed by Peter for
"Rome" (vs. 13; see Rev. 14:8). The "Mark" referred to is the
John Mark of Acts 12:12, 25; 13:5, 13; 15:37. His mother Mary
maintained a house in Jerusalem which was a center for the early
Jerusalem Christian community (Acts 12:12). He was a relative
of Barnabas and accompanied Paul on some of his missionary
labors (Col. 4:10; II Tim. 4:11; Philemon 24). Later tradition

FIRST PETER 5:12-14 155

associates him also with the work of Peter, and identifies him as
the latter's interpreter.

The "kiss of love" or "holy kiss" (vs. 14) is also suggested by
Paul as appropriate among Christians (Rom. 16: 16; I Cor. 16:20;
II Cor. 13:12; I Thess. 5:26). It was apparently a form of salu-
tation or greeting taken over by the Church from contemporary
Judaism (Luke 7:45; 22:48). Peter's closing greeting ("Peace to
all of you that are in Christ") is a variation of the usual con-
temporary Semitic formula, "Peace be with you," or "Peace to
you" (see 1:2).

THE SECOND LETTER OF

PETER

INTRODUCTION

Composition and Style of the Letter

As a literary form Second Peter approaches Hebrews and Ephe-
sians more nearly than any other of the writings of the New
Testament. All are essentially "essays" or "sermons." If it were
not for the fact that in 1:1-2 and 3:1-2 the suggestion is made by
the author that he is in fact writing a letter which is addressed to
the Church, we should never have suspected that this little piece
of literature was other than either essay or homily. Probably,
therefore, we should think of it as originally composed by its
author to serve as an address to be delivered to a particular con-
gregation. Thereafter, either he or another may have superim-
posed upon it the letter form which it now assumes.

The style of this letter or essay is quite unlike that of its sister
epistle. First Peter. First Peter was written by one who knew good
vernacular Greek and who could probably speak and think in the
Greek language, the lingua franca of the day. Second Peter is
written in the artificial, stilted manner of one who is endeavoring
to copy the literary or semi-literary fashion of his contemporar-
ies. The vocabulary of Second Peter is as remarkable as its style,
consisting to some extent of high-sounding words, 57 of which
are not found elsewhere in the New Testament. On the whole, the
author produces the impression of one who was not well ac-
quainted with the Greek language or who may have learned it
rather late in life from reading rather than as a medium for
speaking.

Closely related to the matter of style, and by no means to be di-
vorced from it, is the fact that Second Peter employed portions of
other New Testament writings, altering them considerably to con-
form to his artificial literary style. There can be no doubt, for ex-
ample, that he has used First Peter and Jude in this way, and
possibly also the Gospel of Luke or the tradition lying behind it

SECo^fD peter: introduction 157

(see comment on 1:18), as weU as Romans and Hebrews (see
comment on 2:19-22).

Again related to matters of style and composition is the fact
that Second Peter makes no use of the Greek Old Testament, a
phenomenon remarkable in itself among New Testament writings.
The one quotation is at 2:22 (see Prov, 26:11), and this quota-
tion approximates more nearly to the Hebrew than to the Greek
translation. In addition, there are five citations of Old Testament
incidents (see 2:4, 5, 6, 7, 15-16), but none of these contains an
actual quotation from either the Hebrew or the Greek, and all five
occur in the passage taken over almost bodily from Jude.

Circumstances, Message, and Date of the Letter

Circumstances

Though we have no certain way of knowing who the hearers
were for whom this essay or sermon was prepared, or who the
readers were to whom it was addressed, the circumstances in which
they find themselves are clear. They are being brought under the
influence of "false teachers" (2:1), who are delivering them-
selves of "destructive heresies" and whose lives are characterized
by "licentiousness" (2:2, 13-16).

The sort of teaching which the letter warns against follows
roughly the pattern of what is called for want of a better name
"Gnosticism." The term stands for a loosely organized type of
religious belief which in the early centuries drew to itself both
oriental and occidental elements. It was constantly in a state of
flux and did not develop into rigid forms until the third and
fourth centuries. But it represents a type of philosophical and re-
ligious thinking which has perennially proved attractive to a cer-
tain type of mind. The word itself derives from the Greek word
for "knowledge," and it is no doubt significant that Second Peter
makes much of a Christian type of "knowledge" which may be
thought to stand over against that paraded by the "false teachers"
(see 1:2, 3, 5, 6, 8; 2:20; 3:18).

In the above-mentioned respects, the "false teachers" of Second
Peter were generally like those against whom Jude wrote. Their
"licentiousness" and arrogance were due to the fact that they pre-
tended to possess an esoteric knowledge in spiritual matters which
placed them above the necessity of living true moral lives. It was

158 SECOND peter: introduction

characteristic of Gnosticism of every sort to separate religion and
morals, as having no necessary connection the one with the other.
This was because the Gnostics believed that only soul or spirit
was made up of fine elements which could be saved, while matter
and body were so crudely formed as to be unworthy and incapable
of salvation. In consequence some boasted of the ability to in-
dulge in "licentious passions of the flesh" without endangering the
spirit's salvation (2:18; see Jude 8).

Unlike the false teachers of Jude's time, however, those dis-
cussed in Second Peter scoff particularly at the thought of the
"coming" of Jesus Christ and of "the day of judgment" which will
succeed it (3:3-7).

Message

The message of Second Peter is based upon "the prophetic
word" (1:19) and "the predictions of the holy prophets" (3:2),
as these find support in the apostolic witness (1:12-18; 3:2). The
content of this message is "the knowledge of God and of Jesus our
Lord" (1:2), which enables Christians to escape from "the cor-
ruption that is in the world because of passion" and to become
"partakers of the divine nature" (1:4), and which flowers in a
type of genuine ethical living quite other than the licentiousness
which characterized the current Gnosticism (1:5-11).

This unique Christian "knowledge of God" gives the author a
standard by which he may condemn the "false teachers" (2: 1-22) .
On the basis of such "knowledge of God" as the Christian pos-
sesses (see comment on 3:1-13) he is also able to reply to their
scoffing at the idea of the coming of our Lord and the Judgment.
He rounds out his essay-letter with an exhortation to right ethical
living (3:14-18).

Date

The date of writing of Second Peter is by no means easy to
determine. As is shown in the comment, the author seems to have
been acquainted with the teaching of Romans and Hebrews (2:
19-22) and with the collection of Paul's letters generally (3:15-
16), with the Gospel of Luke (1:16-18) and possibly with that
of Matthew (1:17), and with Jude (2:1-18; 3:2-3). Accord-
ingly, it is obvious that the letter's date is later than those as-
signed to the other writings.

Further, the author clearly places himself and his readers in a

SECOND peter: introduction 159

period succeeding the passing away of at least the first generation
of Christians (3:4). Then, too, there is little if any evidence of
Second Peter's having been used by Christian writers before the
middle or third quarter of the second century. For these reasons
most interpreters of the letter date it sometime after the begin-
ning or even in the middle of the second century.

The arguments advanced for this late date are not entirely con-
clusive. Since the discovery of the Qumran Scrolls there is a rather
general tendency to assign an eariier date than previously to some
of the key writings of the New Testament. This tendency has al-
ready affected the problem of dating some of the writings men-
tioned above and may eventually affect all of them. In conse-
quence, it is less certain than appeared to be the case some years
ago, that we need assign to this letter a date after a.d. 70.

Authorship of the Letter

It is almost universally held among interpreters of Second Peter
that its author was not the Apostle Peter. Most would probably
agree that the letter is an example of the pseudonymous literature
which arose about his name and was given his authority from the
middle of the second century onward. As a comparison of First
Peter with Second Peter shows abundantly, the Greek style, nature
of composition of the two letters, and their respective messages
differ radically.

If it be agreed that Silvanus did the major work in composing
First Peter as its coauthor (see Introduction to First Peter), then
it may be allowed that there are certain factors (though these
are admittedly not entirely conclusive) favoring the Petrine au-
thorship of Second Peter. For example, in 1 : 1 the author writes
as a Jewish Christian might well write to Gentile Christians (note
"ours" and "those"). This observation accords with the fact that
in the only quotation made from the Old Testament in the letter
(2:22), the author appears to be translating directly from the
Hebrew of Proverbs 26:11, rather than employing the common
Greek translation. This may suggest that he was better acquainted
with the Old Testament in Hebrew than in Greek. Further, his use
of Jude and his reference to the Pauline letters might be argued
as in favor of the author's being the Apostle Peter rather than
another. It is unlikely that a Galilean fisherman would know much
about the contemporary Gnostic teaching, and it should not sur-

160 SECOND peter: outline

prise us that in answering such teaching he should lean upon
others as the author apparently does. Furthermore, the author's
humility, as shown in his attitude toward the Pauline letters, is
what one might expect from the genuine Peter (3:15-16; see Gal.
2:11-14). Again, expressions like "the knowledge of God and of
Jesus our Lord" (1:2), "the way of righteousness," and "the holy
commandment" (2:21) are what one might well expect from a
Jewish Christian such as the Apostle Peter. Finally, it is to be ob-
served that we lack criteria (other than such passages from Jesus'
teaching as Luke 12:39-40 and from Paul's at I Thessalonians
5:2-11) for knowing what the earliest disciples may have thought
on the subject of the Second Coming. And inasmuch as at this
point Second Peter agrees with such teachings (see 3:8-10), this
would seem to argue in favor of the apostolic authorship of the
letter. In view of these considerations, the possibility of the Petrine
authorship of Second Peter cannot be denied, any more than can
the possibility of its early date. For these reasons it is best to leave
the matter of authorship and date open, in the hope that future
discoveries may throw more light upon the problem.

OUTLINE

Salutation. IT Peter 1:1-2

The Knowledge of God. II Peter 1:3 — ^3:13

The Knowledge of God in Jesus Christ (1:3-11)
Sources of the Knowledge of God (1:12-21)
Denial of the Knowledge of God (2:1 — 3:13)

Exhortation to Righteous Living. 11 Peter 3:14-18

SECOND PETER 1:1-2 161

COMMENTARY
SALUTATION

n Peter 1:1-2

Like First Peter, Second Peter opens with a salutation closely
resembling Paul's modification of the usual opening of the Greek
letter of that day. The naming of Peter as author of the letter
differs in two respects from that employed in I Peter 1 : 1 — ^first,
in joining Peter's original Aramaic name of "Simon" with his
Greek name (see Matt. 16:17; John 1:42); and second, in
describing Peter as "a servant" as well as an "apostle of Jesus
Christ," In this respect also Second Peter is somewhat patterned
after Paul's formula (see Rom. 1:1).

Unlike First Peter (see 1:1), Second Peter is not addressed to
any particular group of churches, but instead is written to "those
who have obtained a faith of equal standing with ours in the
righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ" (vs. 1). This
unusual description of the readers of the letter, together with its
general format and the fact that it contains no closing greetings,
suggests that in origin it was an essay or sermon, later converted
into a letter by the addition of the opening salutation. However,
as we shall see, the stamp of Peter's experiences and character is
so impressed upon the composition as a whole as to point to its
essential unity and to the fact that it must have been the original
author — ^whoever he may have been, Peter or another — ^who super-
imposed upon the essay the letter form in the name of Peter (see
1:14, 17-18; 3:1-2).

"Faith" plays a relatively small part in the teaching of Second
Peter, the word being found only in verses 1 and 5 of this first
chapter, whereas in First Peter it is found in 1:5, 7, 9, 21, and
5 : 9. Nowhere else in the New Testament is "faith" said to be "in
the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ," the near-
est equivalent to this expression being found in Galatians 5:5
(see also Rom. 1:17). The idea, however, is a thoroughly biblical
one, inasmuch as "righteousness" in the Scriptures represents a
far more concrete conception than with us. We might, therefore,
translate the Greek here rather as "faith ... in the righteous
activity" of God, such activity being the equivalent of the "sal-

162 SECOND PETER 1:3-4

vation" or "deliverance" which he works out for man on the plane
of history through a series of redemptive acts (see Isa. 51:5, 6,
8).

The first part of the benediction in verse 2 ("May grace and
peace be multiplied to you") is identical with that found in I Peter
1:2 (see comment). In what follows in this verse ("in the knowl-
edge of God and of Jesus our Lord") we are introduced to two
points of striking significance for the letter as a whole — first, its
emphasis upon "knowledge," and second, its high view of the
person of Jesus Christ. This is seen here in the close connection of
"God" and "Jesus our Lord," a phenomenon which is duplicated
many times elsewhere in the New Testament (see I Cor. 8:6). The
expression "our God and Savior Jesus Christ" in verse 1, how-
ever, goes beyond the one in verse 2. It is comparable in form to
the expression "our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ" in 1:11; 2:20;
and 3:18 (see also 3:2). There can be no doubt that in these lat-
ter references "Lord" and "Savior" both apply to "Jesus Christ,"
and it is natural, therefore, to take the expression "God and Savior"
as also referring to "Jesus Christ," as is done in the Revised
Standard Version. The only other New Testament passage in
which Jesus Christ is called at once God and Savior is Titus
2:13.

THE KNOWLEDGE OF GOD

n Peter 1:3 — ^3:13

The Kjiowledge of God in Jesus Christ (1:5-11)

Knowledge Leads to Partaking of the Divine Nature (1:3-4)

One of the most striking characteristics of Second Peter (and
one incidentally which distinguishes it markedly from First Peter)
is the emphasis upon "knowledge." Two Greek words, both from
the same stem, are translated in this way in the Revised Standard
Version. The more simple of the two, the word which gives us
"Gnosticism," is found in 1:5, 6 and 3:18; its verb form (to
"understand") appears in 1:20 and 3:3. The related word, also
translated "knowledge," is found in 1:2, 3, 8, and 2:20, and its
verbal form appears twice in 2:21, where it is translated "known"
and "knowing." None of these forms with the exception of the
very first is found in First Peter (see I Peter 3:7, "considerately**).

SECOND PETER 1:5-11 163

and this one instance has no theological significance. In Second
Peter the "knowledge" in question concerns, in the first instance,
an intimate acquaintance and fellowship with God, or, alterna-
tively, with Jesus Christ as Lord. In the New Testament the near-
est approach to Second Peter's meaning is to be found in numer-
ous passages in Paul (see Rom. 1:28; 10:2; Eph. 1:17; 4:13).

In verses 3-4 Peter's thesis is that this intimate "knowledge" of
God is the means whereby men are led to share his "glory and
excellence," thus receiving the fulfillment of "his precious and
very great promises" and at last becoming "partakers of the divine
nature." The creative cause, says our author, which lies behind
this redemptive process is God's "divine power." The expressions
"divine power" and "divine nature," which represent at once the
beginning and end of this redemptive activity of God, find no
parallel in the New Testament, but the ideas involved are biblical.
It needs no proof that throughout the Scriptures the power of God
lies behind the redemptive process. And it is clear that for Second
Peter, to be "partakers of the divine nature" is simply to say that
God has "called us to his own glory and excellence" — a wholly
biblical idea (see Rom. 2:10; 5:2; 8:21; I Cor. 2:7; II Cor. 3:18).

In the phrase "his own glory and excellence" we probably have
a form of expression where two words are used to express a single
idea. In Isaiah 42:8 and 12 the Greek translation of the Hebrew
(rendered in the Revised Standard Version "glory" and "praise")
employs the same two Greek words as are found here. "Ex-
cellence," therefore, should be taken to mean the same as "glory,"
and both together represent the fact that, by the "divine power,"
man is to be raised to the stature of the manifested nature of God
in all of his moral excellence (see Eph. 4:13). The statement that
God gives his people "all things that pertain to life and godliness"
sounds very much like the teaching of Jesus, as for example, in
Matthew 6:33 and 7:11. God's salvation of man issues in "escape
from . . . corruption" and the effects of man's "passion" (see also
2:10, 18; 3:3).

Confirmation of Election by Ethical Living (1:5-11)

The title of this section might equally have been "confirmation
of faith by ethical living," inasmuch as it opens with the sug-
gestion that the readers should "make every effort to supplement
. . . [their] faith with virtue" (vs. 5). The thesis which is devel-
oped here is that one's theology or religion should be followed up

164 SECOND PETER 1:5-11

by ethical living appropriate to it. And in this respect the teach-
ing is like that of Paul in Romans and Ephesians. For in these
two letters the earlier chapters (Rom. 1-11; Eph. 1-3) are de-
voted to theology, and as the "therefore" (Rom. 12:1 and Eph.
4:1) indicates, the ethical exhortations which follow are based
upon the sound theology which precedes. Second Peter's "for this
very reason" in the present section has the same effect as Paul's
"therefore."

The general teaching of the passage is to the effect that the
Christian's "faith" should blossom in right ethical Uving, in order
that his "knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ" (vs. 8) might not
prove "ineffective or unfruitful," but that rather he should show
himself as one "cleansed from his old sins" (vs. 9) and so "con-
firm . . . piis] call and election" (vs. 10). The ultimate end or goal
of this confirmation of the Christian's "faith" and "election," says
Second Peter, is that he may find "entrance into the eternal king-
dom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ" (vs. 11).

Here for the first time we have a reference to the eschatologi-
cal perspective which is fundamental to the thought of our author.
As we shall see, this perspective dominates his thought from verse
16 onward to the end of the letter, and more particularly in chap-
ters 2 and 3. In this respect his teaching approximates closely that
of First Peter (see I Peter 1:3, 7, 11, 13; 3:21-22; 4:6, 7-11, 13-
14; 5:10). The phrase "eternal kingdom" appears nowhere else
in the New Testament, the nearest approach to it being in Luke
16:9 ("eternal habitations") and in II Corinthians 5:1 ("a house
not made with hands, eternal in the heavens"). The author may
have in mind, of course, Jesus' teaching in Mark 10:15 and the
Johannine concept of "eternal life" (John 3:15-16), and there is
even some remote relation to Paul's teaching in I Corinthians
15:24, 28.

Somewhat sunilar lists of the ethical implications of "faith"
(vss. 5-7) are to be found in Romans 5:1-5; Galatians 5:22-23;
Ephesians 5:9; I Timothy 6:11. Paul terms all of these "the fruit
of the Spirit" (Gal. 5:22) , and Second Peter has already expressed
the similar idea that they proceed from God's "divine power" (vs.
3). Nonetheless, for both Paul and Second Peter, man is to put
forth "every effort" to see that the ethical life matches his religious
faith (vs. 5; see Rom. 6:11-23). "Virtue" (vs. 5) refers to the
"excellence" of man's character and activity which give expression
to his "faith." "Self-control" was a virtue much admired by the

SECOND PETER 1:12-18 165

Stoics and other Greeks, but it had already been baptized into
Christian usage by the Church (see Acts 24:25; I Cor. 9:25; and
Gal. 5:23). In Christian thought it is the natural outcome of com-
plete surrender to the lordship of God over one's life (Matt. 6:33;
Rom. 6:17-18, 22). Ethical living, says Second Peter, is a clear
indication of the Christian's not forgetting that he has been
"cleansed from his old sins" (vs. 9) . This is a favorite teaching of
the Apostle Paul also (Rom. 6:1-11; 8:1-11; Gal. 5:13-24; see
also I Peter 4:1-6). The idea that the ordinary Christian receives
a "call and election" from God (vs. 10) was also a common doc-
trine of the Church by the time Second Peter was written (for
"call" see Matt. 22: 14; Mark 2: 17; Rom. 8:30; I Cor. 1 :26; 7:20;
Gal. 1 : 6; and for "election," Matt. 22: 14; Luke 18:7; Rom. 8:33;
Col. 3:12;IThess. 1:4).

Sources of the Knowledge of God (1:12-21)

The Apostolic Witness (1:12-18)

The remainder of chapter 1 is devoted to a discussion of the
sources of the knowledge of God about which the author has been
writing in verses 3-11. These sources are: first, the Apostles (note
"we" in vss. 16-19), and second, the prophets (vs. 19). In at-
tributing the knowledge of God which was the possession of the
early Christian Church to the Apostles and to the prophets before
them, Second Peter is in line with the teaching of First Peter (see
I Peter 1:10-12 and 5:1).

The author first describes the apostolic witness which lies be-
hind the Church's knowledge of God, and in so doing he identifies
himself with the Apostle Peter (vs. 14; see John 21:18-19). He
declares that "the putting off of . . . [his] body" (which the "Lord
Jesus Christ showed" him) would occur "soon." In other words,
he writes as Peter would have written in his old age and when
conscious of the fact that the end was near. He speaks of his wit-
ness as merely a "reminder" (vs. 13; see also vs. 12 and 3:1). It
is clear that he does not think of himself as giving his readers
the great gospel facts for the first time, for they already "know
them and are established in the truth" with regard to them (vs.
12; see 3:1-2). His "reminder" — or, as it were, his memorandum
— ^is made with a view to their being able after his "departure . . .
at any time to recall these things" (vs. 15).

166 SECOND PETER 1:19-21

To demonstrate the validity of his witness as a source of the
knowledge of God, the author selects out of numerous possible
experiences that one when Peter with his two associates was
"with him [that is, Jesus] on the holy mountain" of transfiguration
(vs. 18). Here Peter and his associates had been "eyewitnesses of
his majesty" (vs. 16), a "majesty" the like of which Jesus in his
incarnate life had not hitherto assumed. And he would not again
assume such "majesty" until the second "coming" (vs. 16), when
the event would be accompanied with unique "power."

This witness which the author proclaims is no doubt to be
identified with the "truth," which he says in verse 12 his readers
have already come to possess. Such identification of the apostolic
witness or gospel with "the truth" is a common phenomenon in
the New Testament (see John 5:33; 8:32; Gal. 2:5; Eph. 1:13).
In II Timothy 4:4 and Titus 1:14, this "truth" of the gospel is
contrasted, as in verse 16, with "cleverly devised myths." Both
Jews and Gentiles, as the other two references suggest, knew and
propagated such myths devised to express or undergird religious
teachings. The author's clear intention is to deny that the Chris-
tian faith must look for support to such a worthless mythology.
Rather, like the prophetic faith taught in all of Scripture, it is
founded upon eyewitness testimony to the redemptive activity of
God on the plane of history.

The Prophetic Word (1:19-21)

The second source of information (actually the first chrono-
logically) of the "knowledge" of God, of which the author has
been speaking, is "the prophetic word" (vs. 19). In the context of
the author's thought and the situation in which he is writing, this
"prophetic word" is of an eschatological nature and has as its
content the "coming" of Jesus Christ (see vs. 16). The Trans-
figuration has "made more sure," through its revelation of the
"glory" of Jesus Christ, the fact of his coming; it is a sort of fore-
taste of the glory of Christ which will be his at his coming again.

The author warns his readers that they "will do well to pay
attention" to this prophecy regarding Jesus' coming again, inas-
much as "no prophecy ever came by the impulse of man" (vs.
21). Rather, the prophets were "men moved by the Holy Spirit"
and they, therefore, "spoke from God." It is not too much to say
that to his mind the prophets and Apostles were on a par as in-
struments of revelation. A comparison of verses 18 and 21 with

I

SECOND PETER 2:1-22 167

each other makes this clear; the Apostles had a "voice borne
from heaven" to them, and similarly the prophets were recipients
of the "Holy Spirit" and in consequence "spoke from God."

Second Peter's suggestion further that "no prophecy of scrip-
ture is a matter of one's own interpretation" (vs. 20) is quite
clearly intended as a basic principle to be used in replying to the
"scoffers" (see 3:3) with whom he is about to deal. Verses 20
and 21 taken together are intended to say that only the "Holy
Spirit," through whom the prophetic word comes, is capable of in-
terpreting that word. In consequence, his readers are forewarned
that it is their duty to discover through whom Scripture is being
properly interpreted in their generation.

In verse 19 "the day" which is about to dawn is the day of
consummation, of judgment, of the coming of Jesus Christ (see
Amos 5:18; Mark 13:32; I Thess. 5:2). The Greek word here
translated "the morning star" occurs nowhere else in the New
Testament; "the morning star" in Revelation 2:28 and "the
bright morning star" in Revelation 22:16 represent other Greek
expressions. However, the latter gives us the key to the author's
meaning, as it is Jesus who is there speaking as he says, "I am the
root and the offspring of David, the bright morning star" (see
Isa. 11:1, 10). In any case, when the author combines two ex-
pressions such as "the day dawns" and "the morning star rises in
your hearts," he is rather obviously referring at one and the same
time to a general future fact (the "coming of our Lord Jesus
Christ," vs. 16) and to a personal experience (the same Jesus'
"coming" in one's own life). This combination need not seem
strange to us, in view of the fact that the author had seen in his
own experience of the Transfiguration an anticipation of the Final
Coming.

Denial of the Ejiowledge of God (2:1 — ^3:13)

Existence of False Prophets and False Teachers (2:1-22)

It is rather generally agreed that in his description of the "false
teachers" (vs. 1), their "heresies" and their "licentiousness" (vs.
2) , the author is relying on and employing the Uttle Letter of Jude
(particularly vss. 4-13, 18). We shall not attempt here a detailed
comparison of the two letters. But the student should notice that
in general the "false teachers" are described as "denying the

168 SECOND PETER 2:1-22

Master who bought them" (vs. 1; see Jude 4), and as indulging
in unethical cx)nduct which both authors describe as a crude
"licentiousness" (vs. 2; see Jude 4). In both letters these unde-
sirable teachers who have made entry into the Christian Church
are characterized as arrogant "scoffers" (3:3; see Jude 18), and
in both their "condemnation" or "destruction" is threatened (vss.
3, 17; 3:7; see Jude 13, 22-23) . It should be noted, too, that many
of the illustrations of rebellion against God cited by the two au-
thors are the same, for example, the fallen angels (vs. 4; Jude 6) ,
Sodom and Gomorrah (vs. 6; Jude 7), and Balaam (vs. 15; Jude
11). Much of the phraseology employed by the authors to de-
scribe the "false teachers" is similar, if not identical; for example,
they "revile the glorious ones" (vs. 10; Jude 8) and act like "ir-
rational animals" (vs. 12; see Jude 10); they are described as
"blemishes" in their "carousing" (vs. 13; Jude 12) and are "water-
less springs and mists driven by a storm" (vs. 17; Jude 12), for
whom "the nether gloom of darkness has been reserved" (vs. 17;
Jude 13). This is by no means an exhaustive list of the similari-
ties between the two letters, but it will perhaps serve to suggest the
likelihood that Second Peter employs Jude's description of these
"false teachers," since that description suits his purpose.

In 2:1-3 the author is concerned to suggest that his readers
should remember how at all times in the history of the people of
God the true and the false are found together, and that a choice
must be made by this people. Just as in the past "false prophets"
were found along with those who had the prophetic word in their
mouths, so now there are "false teachers" to be distinguished
from the true (see Matt. 7:15-23). From the description of these
false teachers, it seems clear that they were of the type loosely de-
scribed as "Gnostic." Such teachers arose within both Judaism and
Christianity and drew their teachings from a multitude of sources.
Like the modem "theosophists," they were eclectics — ^that is, they
selected from here and there teachings congenial to their own
thinking. They were generally arrogant, holding that they alone
were in possession of the "way of truth" (vs. 2), and their arro-
gance was usually matched with "licentiousness" or immoral
living.

In verses 4-10 the author enlarges on the idea expressed in
verse 3, to the effect that the "false teachers" will discover that
"their condemnation has not been idle, and their destruction has
not been asleep." He selects three outstanding examples from the

SECOND PETER 2:1-22 169

patriarchal times in proof of his thesis — namely, "the angels when
they sinned" (vs. 4; see Gen. 6:1-4); "the ancient world" at the
time of the flood (vs. 5; Gen. 6:5-7); and finally, the "turning the
cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to ashes" (vs. 6; Gen. 19:24-25).
Second Peter's argument from these three examples is that God
"knows how ... to keep the unrighteous under punishment until
the day of judgment" (vs. 9). At the same time, he also cites the
cases of Noah (vs. 5; Gen. 6:8-22; 8:20-22) and Lot (vss. 7-8;
Gen. 19: 15-23), to indicate that the Lord "knows how to rescue
the godly from trial" (vs. 9).

The reference in verse 4 to the fallen "angels" (see Jude 6)
arises from the fact that the Greek translation of Genesis 6:1-4,
instead of "sons of God," reads "angels of God." This teaching
about the fallen angels was greatly elaborated in the apocryphal
book of First Enoch, with which either Jude or Second Peter or
both seem to have been familiar. This book teaches that for their
sin these angels were "cast . . . into hell and cormnitted ... to pits
of nether gloom to be kept until the judgment" (vs. 4; see I Enoch
10:4-13). Jude does not refer to the case of Noah, and probably
Second Peter derived the reference to him, and the "seven other
persons" with him, from I Peter 3:20. Similarly, although the
example of "Sodom and Gomorrah" is found in both Second
Peter and Jude (vs. 6; Jude 7), that of the "righteous Lot" is found
nowhere else in the New Testament except in Luke 17:28-32,
where Noah also is cited as an example (vss. 26-27).

The two sins which are particularly abhorrent to the author and
which he sees illustrated in the examples he has cited, he now
specifies as indulgence in "the lust of defiling passion" and as the
tendency to "despise authority" (vs. 10). He has already spoken
of these two sins, employing a slightly different terminology, in
verses 1-3, and he will further develop his picture of the con-
temporary "false teachers" along these two lines.

Verses 10b- 18 follow very closely the text of Jude 8-13. Like
Jude (see Jude 8-10), Second Peter says that the false teachers,
"bold and wilful," do not hesitate to "revile the glorious ones"
(vs. 10b). These false teachers are then compared with "angels"
who do not indulge in such "reviling" (vs. 11), and with "ir-
rational animals" in their "reviling in matters of which they are
ignorant" (vs. 12). It is not clear to what event the author has
reference here. Jude has a more specific reference to "the arch-
angel Michael" at this point, and he says that, while "contending

170 SECOND PETER 2:1-22

with the devil . . . about the body of Moses," Michael refrained
from reviling the latter. Instead, the archangel merely said, "The
Lord rebuke you" (Jude 9; see Zech. 3:2). No such incident is
recorded anywhere in Scripture, and it has been assumed by some
that Jude (and, following him less precisely. Second Peter) is
citing here an incident recorded in the lost apocryphal book, The
Assumption of Moses. However this may be, in both letters it is
the arrogance of the false teachers upon which stress is laid. They^
"will be destroyed . . . suffering wrong for their wrongdoing"
(vss. 12-13).

The second sin of the false teachers is variously described by
both Second Peter and Jude as "reveling," "carousing," "adultery,"
and "greed" (vss. 13-18; Jude 11-13). Jude actually suggests that
this reveling was carried on at the "love feasts" of the Christians
(Jude 12). And some of our best manuscripts read "their love
feasts" instead of "their dissipation" (vs. 13; see margin). The
difference in the Greek words involved amounts only to a change
of two letters! Paul also is witness to the fact of such scandalous
reveling on the occasion of the Lord's Supper (see I Cor. 11:21).
It seems unbelievable that any Christians, however heretical,
should have converted the most sacred of Christian rituals into a
debauchery. And yet we must recall that many of these Chris-
tians, particularly those who had come out of a pagan environ-
ment, were not far removed from their former manner of living.

The example of "Balaam," to whom reference is made by both
Second Peter and Jude (vss. 15-16; Jude 11; Num. 22-24), and
who in both letters is taken as an example of one who "loved gain
from wrongdoing," is striking. This is particularly so because in
Revelation 2: 14 it is said that in the church at Pergamum in the
Roman province of Asia a like "teaching of Balaam" was found.
Second Peter follows the account in Numbers in implying that the
"dumb ass" (vs. 16) had more prophetic insight than the prophet
whom he bore! Like Jude, the author suggests that such teachers
are merely "waterless springs," "mists driven by a storm," and
that for them the same "nether gloom of darkness has been re-
served" as for the fallen angels (vss. 17-18; see vs. 4 and Jude
12-13). We are reminded of Paul's description of immaturity as
characterized by being "tossed to and fro and carried about with
every wind of doctrine" (Eph. 4: 14), and of the sins of the Gen-
tiles who "have given themselves up to licentiousness, greedy to
practice every kind of uncleanness" (see Eph. 4:17-24).

SECOND PETER 2:1-22 171

The general teaching of verses 19-22 is that these false teachers
are men who cannot distinguish liberty from license. They have
tasted somewhat of the "freedom" of the Christian faith but they
have used that freedom to become "slaves of corruption" (vs.
19). This is the type of thinking and acting which in the termi-
nology of Christian ethics is called "antinomianism," that is, the
teaching that freedom from the Law means that one is now free
to do as he pleases, rather than as God pleases. Paul had to write
against this sort of teaching, and in Romans 6 he made Second
Peter's point that "whatever overcomes a man, to that he is en-
slaved" (vs. 19; see Rom. 6:16-18). According to the Fourth
Gospel, Jesus had said very much the same thing (see John 8 : 34) .
It is generally believed that the "Nicolaitans" held to such antino-
mian teaching within the Christian Church (see Rev. 2:6, 14-15).

Verses 20-22 set forth the thesis that those who attain the
freedom of the Christian "through the knowledge of our Lord and
Savior Jesus Christ" and then turn back to the "defilements of the
world" are worse off than they were before; "the last state has be-
come worse for them than the first" (vs. 20). This teaching also has
a familiar ring about it. For the sentence just quoted is almost
an exact quotation of Matthew 12:45, and essentially the same
teaching is also found in Hebrews 6:1-8. In verse 21 the two
phrases "the way of righteousness" and "the holy commandment
delivered to them," which clearly refer to the Christian gospel
and its implications for ethical living, appear to be peculiar to
Second Peter in the New Testament, although somewhat similar
terms with essentially the same meaning are found elsewhere (see
Matt. 7:13-14; John 13:34; 15:12; compare Rom. 7:12). In
verse 22 the first part of the proverb ("The dog turns back to his
own vomit") is probably taken from Proverbs 26:11, but the
combination of the "dog" and the "sow" sounds very much like
Matthew 7:6.

But if there is nothing new in the present section, it is at least
informative of the hazardous state of the Church when it is sur-
rounded by the defilements of a pagan society. The author, like
the Apostle Paul, saw clearly the dire need of warning his readers
that the Christian ethic follows naturally from the Christian the-
ology. "You shall be holy, for I am holy" expresses this relation-
ship as it is assumed throughout the totality of the Old and New
Testament Scriptures (Lev. 19:2; see I Peter 1:16). The teaching
of this section may be conveniently summed up in the words of

172 SECOND PETER 3:1-13

I Peter 2:16: "Live as free men, yet without using your freedom
as a pretext for evil."

Scoffers at the Final Coming and the Judgment (3:1-4)

In addition to "denying the Master who bought them" (2:1) and
so "the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ" (2:20),
the false teachers also are found to be "scoffers" at the thought of
the final coming of Jesus Christ as the Judge and Savior of men
(vss. 3-4) . It is this hostile attitude toward the Church's eschato-
logical teaching with which the author deals in the closing chapter
of his letter. He opens his discussion of this problem with refer-
ences to the two major sources upon which he has been relying —
namely, to First Peter (vs. 1), and to Jude, which he follows
closely in 3:2-3 (Jude 17-18). And as before (see 1:12-15), he
remarks that his own task is merely to arouse "your sincere mind
by way of reminder" (vs. 1 ) of both "the predictions of the holy
prophets" and "the commandment of the Lord and Savior through
, . . [their] apostles" (vs. 2).

It is important to notice the exact way in which the problem
is phrased by the "scoffers" whom the author wishes to answer.
They refer to "the promise of his coming" (vs. 4), and they set
this promise in the context of the fact that they are second or
third generation Christians. The letter was quite evidently written
at a day when it could be said that "the fathers" had fallen
"asleep"; that is to say, the first generation had all died. The way
in which the problem is stated implies that there was a group in
the contemporary Christian community who believed that Jesus
had predicted his "coming" as to be fulfilled within the lifetime
of "the fathers." This manner of stating the problem, therefore,
raises a twofold question: first, whether Jesus made any pre-
diction at all with reference to his "coming"; and second, if
he did, whether it was intended to have a specific time reference
pertaining to the generation of "the fathers." Second Peter accepts
by implication the contention that Jesus had made a general
promise of his coming. However, he appears equally to imply in
his answer that Jesus had never made any stipulation as to the
time of the promise's fulfillment.

Second Peter's Reply to the Scoffers (3:5-13)

The first answer of our author to the scoffers is of a logical
nature. And it is based upon two assumptions which underlie the

SECOND PETER 3:5-13 173

teaching of the prophetic Scriptures with regard to the relation of
God to his universe — namely, first, the thought that God is Sov-
ereign over his world, and second, that as the beginning of the
world was with "water," its end will be with "fire."

The first of these assumptions (that God is Sovereign over his
universe) may be said to be the most fundamental postulate of the
Scriptures with regard to God. "God is Lord" is as surely the
basic statement of the Old Testament as "Jesus is Lord" is that of
the New Testament (see Deut. 6:4-5; I Cor. 12:3). Because God
is Sovereign, therefore, he is is also at once Creator and Judge.
This is Second Peter's meaning as he writes that the scoffers "de-
liberately ignore" the fact that "by the word of God heavens ex-
isted long ago, and an earth formed out of water and by means of
water" (vs. 5) — that is, God is Creator; and similarly, the fact
that "by the same word the heavens and earth that now exist have
been stored up for fire, being kept until the day of judgment and
destruction of ungodly men" (vs. 7) — ^that is, God is Judge of all
the creation which he has made.

The second postulate, which is equally prophetic with the first,
is to the effect that the earth was formed out of "water," that is,
was in a liquid state at the beginning, but that this water was not
suflScient finally to destroy creation. It is true that "the world that
then existed was deluged with water and perished" (vs. 6), but
this perishing was merely a passing phase and not the end of
creation (for this reference to the Flood see Gen. 8:20-22). For
out of the creation there were preserved "the heavens and earth
that now exist," and these are subject to God's ultimate judgment
by "fire."

This prophetic conception of "water" as the material employed
by the "word of God" at creation, and of "fire" as the destructive
agency by which the "heavens and earth" will eventually be
judged, is carried through extensively in the apocalyptic literature.
In the New Testament itself the Revelation to John provides many
examples of the place of water over against fire. Thus, for ex-
ample, "the river of the water of life" plays a leading part in the
creation of the new heavens and the new earth (Rev. 22:1-2);
while fire (Rev. 16:8; 17:16), or "the lake of fire" (Rev. 19:20;
20:10), or even the "sea of glass mingled with fire" before the
throne of God (Rev. 15:2), stands for the destructive force resi-
dent in God's creation. No doubt, too, the contrast between the
baptisms of John and of Jesus as being, on the one hand, with

174 SECOND PETER 3:5-13

"water," and on the other, with "fire," reflects this type of pro-
phetic-apocalyptic contrast between the two elements (see Matt.
3:11).

On the basis of these two prophetic postulates, then, Second
Peter argues that the sovereign God of the universe will, of
course, judge and destroy all of his creation (including "ungodly
men") that he finds to be unworthy of his salvation (vs. 7).

Second Peter's second argument against the "scoffers" and their
views with regard to the Final Coming and the Judgment repre-
sents his most original contribution to this subject. He derives it
from Psalm 90:4, though he does not quote the Psalm as it ap-
pears in either the Hebrew or the Greek. In both those languages
the psalmist speaks of "yesterday" as being comparable to "a
thousand years" in the Lord's sight. It is, however, not hindsight
with which Second Peter is dealing but rather foresight. Conse-
quently, he alters the Psalm to read, "with the Lord one day is as
a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day" (vs. 8). And
his argument assumes that Jesus' promise of his "coming" was of
the most general sort, in line with the prophetic teaching regard-
ing "the day of the Lord," which began, so far as our information
leads us to believe, with Amos (see Amos 5:18). This "day,"
argues our author on the basis of Psalm 90:4, is not to be reck-
oned with any yardstick known to man. It is God's day and is to
be calculated only by such method of reckoning as he employs.

Consequently, it is fallacious to argue that, inasmuch as "the
fathers . . . [have fallen] asleep," the promise has failed. This could
only be true if Jesus in making the promise had stated it in terms
of man's chronological reckoning, and our author assumes that
he never did any such thing. Instead, we should assume that the
apparent "slowness" about the promise's fulfillment is due to the
fact that the Lord "is forbearing" and "not wishing that any
should perish, but that all should reach repentance" (vs. 9). We
should rather "count the forbearance of our Lord as salvation"
(vs. 15; compare Luke 13:8; Rom. 3:25-26; Heb. 12:5-8; I Peter
3:20; Rev. 6:9-11; 9:20-21).

The author now concludes his second argument, adding to his
own original formulation of it a thought which must have become
by his day a commonplace in Christian thinking — namely, that
"the day of the Lord will come like a thief (vs. 10). According
to the Gospel writers, Jesus himself had taught this (see Matt.
24:43; Luke 12:39; and compare Mark 13:35-36); it was also

SECOND PETER 3:14-18 175

the teaching of the Apostle Paul (see I Thess. 5:2-6); and it is
found also in the Revelation to John (3:3; 16:15). The description
of the end which foUows (vs. 10) is a repetition in slightly dif-
ferent terms of what we have already seen (vs. 7; see also vss.
11-13).

But the end of God's purpose for mankind is not destruction.
The author adds to his twofold reply to the scoffers the assurance,
which is common to the Scriptures first and last, that God is more
than Judge; he is also Savior and Re-creator. It is true that "the
heavens will be kindled and dissolved, and the elements will melt
with fire" (vs. 12) . This is by no means all that "the coming of the
day of God" will mean for mankind, for "his promise" includes
the coming of "new heavens and a new earth in which righteous-
ness dwells" (vs. 13). And it is because Christians look for this
re-creation that they realize that they should order their lives in
"holiness and godliness" (vs. 11).

This teaching with regard to "new heavens and a new earth"
goes back to Isaiah 65: 17; 66:22. And it is a major theme in the
Revelation to John (see chs. 21 and 22) as of other apocalyptic
writings. The thought is fundamental to the prophetic conception
of the nature of God as a God of righteousness, grace, and truth.
Second Peter does not explain how Christians may further the
"hastening" of the "coming of the day of God" (vs. 12). But, in
the context of his thought, we may perhaps conclude that "lives
of holiness and godliness" are the instruments which God has
placed at man's disposal for furthering this end (vs. 11).

EXHORTATION TO RIGHTEOUS LIVING

n Peter 3:14-18

The author devotes the last section of his sermon and letter to
an exhortation to his Christian readers to live "lives of holiness
and godUness" (see vs. 11), or as he now says, "be zealous to be
found by him without spot or blemish, and at peace" (vs. 14).
This is to say that the Final Coming and the Judgment, together
with the thought of "new heavens and a new earth in which
righteousness dwells" (vs. 13), are to serve as the Christian's
motive for right living. The motive of fear, it should be observed,
is not suggested. Nor is there anything morbid about the motive
which he does suggest. The point is the one found everywhere

176 SECOND PETER 3:14-18

throughout the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments: that
God is both Judge and Savior of mankind, and that man is al-
ways to live his life in righteousness and peace, in love and truth,
because God is a God of holiness and righteousness who demands
that man shall so live his Ufe (see I Peter 1:15-16). Man is not
taught to live in terror of this holy God, but rather simply to
"count the forbearance of our Lord as salvation" (vs. 15; see vs.
9 above). In closing, accordingly, the author returns to the first
theme of the letter, suggesting that it is the function of Christians
to "grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior
Jesus Christ" (vs. 18; see 1:2, 5-11). Such growth will lead to a
deepening understanding of the nature of God and at the same
time induce in us a hke nature.

In the midst of his exhortation Second Peter again warns his
readers against "the error of lawless men," that is, presumably,
the scoffers of whom he has been speaking (vs. 17; see 2:17-22;
3:3-7). And again identifying himself with the Apostle Peter, he
refers to the manner in which his "beloved brother Paul" wrote.
He declares that there are "some things" in Paul's letters which are
"hard to understand" (vs. 16) — presumably, in the present con-
text, a doctrine like Paul's "glorious liberty of the children of
God" (Rom. 8:21). Such a doctrine, says the author, "the ig-
norant and unstable twist to their own destruction" (converting
liberty into licentiousness), and it is clear from Paul's own
writing that this statement is in accordance with the facts (see his
argument at Rom. 6:1-23).

Second Peter ends his letter with a benediction: "To him be
the glory both now and to the day of eternity. Amen." The term
"glory" stands alone as in Romans 16:27 and Hebrews 13:21, a
phenomenon, however, which is in accordance with the general
thought of Second Peter that man is to reflect the glory of God
(see 1:3, 17). The expression "the day of eternity" is found no-
where else in the New Testament. It is clearly intended to refer
to the total extent of the eternal order and no doubt is a reflection
of the teaching in verses 8-9.

fiuP^^ \ in

Dare
dReturned

Due
Due

Returned

Aub u 1 y-

%141!IK

nkt ] \ IS

^?AH^30W»7

'

/

•

.^

•.

•.

*.

■

•

, •

1

di